This is about the discrepancy between what people think is the summit of a hill and the summit as listed in the database of British & Irish Hills.
Case in point: Ling Fell in the North-Western Wainwrights. Here's the viewranger track of my visit:
You can find dozens of trip reports that talk of the 'summit trig point' and I've clearly visited it here.
But!
When I check my gpx file against the summit as listed in the database I find that the nearest I came to the summit was 216 feet away. The following image shows my track with the summit as the grey circle (can't use OS mapping with this software unfortunately)
I am ruling out this simply being inaccuracy with my GPS device as the trace clearly goes right through the trig point (on the OS map) and the marked summit (on the openstreetmap).
There are noted, and obvious, examples of the Wainwright summit being different from the true summit but I think you'd need surveying equipment to identify the true summit on something like Ling Fell. The database itself says:
ground is 1m higher than trig point 70m NNW at NY17961 28593 (W,B); cairn 50m N at NY 17982 28582 is 0.5m lower
70m? Sounds very much like 216 feet to me.
I've seen people checking the summit with their GPS device but what of us who've been walking the hills for donkey's years?
Have I really completed the Wainwrights? Have you?