Wikipedia talk:Scottish Wikipedians' notice board/Archive 7

This page is an current talk page .

Article Burgh of barony states that "were created between 1450 and 1707". Is this misleading, or does this mean that Baronial burghs are different from Burghs of barony, since the first burgh founded by a baron dates to between the years 1124 and 1127, that is, the burgh of Renfrew founded by the new Stewart lord of Strathgryfe. And where would this place the burgh of Haddington, which may have been founded by an earl, and was certainly under the control of the earls of Dunbar for large periods. Since an earl is higher than a baron, would this be a comital burgh? Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 00:57, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Take a look at this site for brief explanations of the different burgh types. http://www.scan.org.uk/knowledgebase/topics/burgh.htm --Billreid 15:36, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, but it just says the same thing the wiki articles say and indeed looks like their source, and so I'm none the wiser. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 16:41, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Can someone please tell me if the use of council logos is inappropriate. There are three articles that I've contributed to that are descriptions of burghs or council areas. I included the image of the council logo but have been reverted and the image removed. Since we actually have a category:Scottish council logos what is the position here. Thanks --Billreid 16:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

It's fair use (to a degree) to use a council logo on the page for that council. It's really not fair use to use it on articles for towns and cities inside that council area. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 19:51, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for that --Billreid 11:35, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

All of the following name changes are being discussed at

• Kenneth I of Scotland
• Cináed II of Scotland → Kenneth II of Scotland
• Cináed III of Scotland → Kenneth III of Scotland
• Donald I of Scotland
• Domnall II of Scotland → Donald II of Scotland
• Domnall III of Scotland → Donald III of Scotland
• Donnchad I of Scotland → Duncan I of Scotland
• Donnchad II of Scotland → Duncan II of Scotland
• Máel Coluim I of Scotland → Malcolm I of Scotland
• Máel Coluim II of Scotland → Malcolm II of Scotland
• Máel Coluim III of Scotland → Malcolm III of Scotland

I'd appreciate it if some editors have a look at the New Lanark article and perhaps make some edits to clean it up and bring it more in line with other articles. Thanks/wangi 15:56, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

There is a dispute on Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley. It is quite petty. User:Proteus and his ally User:Alci12, insist on calling him "1st Duke of Albany"; whereas User:Waimea, User:Rcpaterson and myself are pointing out that this is quite pointless and misleading. He was not actually the "first" Duke of Albany, the only reason for calling him that is because of a cranky system known only to those who have been using crummy peerage books. Under this system, a thing called "creation" is imposed on past grants of titles. Therefore, Darnley by this system is the "1st Duke of Albany" because he was granted the title without reference to claims purely at the will of the crown. This is all very well, but IMHO there is no need to call him "1st Duke of Albany" when "Duke of Albany will do", and there is no ambiguity in this case. Anyways, there needs to be mediation. There is also the issue of Proteus' bad behaviour as an admin, which includes using the roll-back function to revert (see Wikipedia:Administrators#Reverting) and lying to other users: e.g. he claimed that a project page which he wrote is "policy", presumably in an effort to get his way. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 02:38, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

I've had problems with the two of them before. There's another, as well. They're from the Peerage WP, and quite intent on presenting those crummy peerage books which you refer to as reality. Good luck, I'll be over there shortly.File:Icons-flag-scotland.png Canæn File:Icons-flag-scotland.png 23:30, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

They seem to have given up the fight on this for now, but the page still needs watching in case they return. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 23:32, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

The "xth" is not used for Royal Dukes- eg Prince Richard, Duke of Gloucester- if that helps. Astrotrain 20:30, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

We use Gaelic in the geography articles. Is there any reason why it should not be used in the economics articles too?

• Royal Bank of Scotland - "rv- no need to use a foreign language"

Thanks. --Mais oui! 20:11, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I've noticed a mini edit-war over this going on in the Bank of Scotland article too. It seems to me that these banks are legal entities, and their names are "Proper Nouns" and as such, they should only be translated in the introduction part of the main English article if there is an official translation for them, as used or offered by the company. If not, then Astrotrain is right to say, "there's a Gaelic Wikipedia for that", although I'd personally favour mentioning the translation somewhere lower down in the article if the Gaelic version is commonly used in certain parts of the country. – Kieran T ^{(talk | contribs)} 20:15, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

As Scotland is not bi-lingual, there is no need to provide Gaelic names for everything Scottish. I suppose geography is different, as it is common for different names to exist in different languages, whereas for everything else it is a direct translation of basic words. Astrotrain 20:18, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Gaelic not relevant here as this is English Wikipedia. If anybody wishes to contribute articles in Gaelic, then please do so in the appropriate place. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.246.2 (talk • contribs) 21:44, 8 September 2006

The above comment is the 2nd-ever contribution by that IP address. It is highly likely to be yet another Mallimak sockpuppet: Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Mallimak. --Mais oui! 22:07, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I see no reason why a small Gaelic translation, on an article detailing a public body (at least insofar as it has as much to do as it does with daily life in Scotland, to my knowledge), should not be seen as fit to stand. It doesn't detract anything from the article, and there are indeed folks in Scotland who speak Gaelic still, so why not? I don't suppose that every biographical article ought to have a Gaelic name translation, nor every article about every building in the city of Dundee (to name somewhat potentially insignificant articles), but this is somewhat helpful, and doesn't detract one bit. File:Icons-flag-scotland.png Canæn File:Icons-flag-scotland.png 05:02, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

It does detract from it if it misleads people into believing that the Gaelic version is an official name of the organisation. If it's not, it's not. We don't, for example, have a French translation of "Royal Bank of Scotland" in the English Wikipedia, but French used to be the language used by Scottish Royalty. Nor do we have a Punjabi translation, despite the number of citizens for whom that's perhaps their first language. – Kieran T ^{(talk | contribs)} 11:27, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

I have actually seen the Gaelic name of the RBS used in the Scottish Highlands, so it is an official name for the RBS. Indeed, it is mentioned on this page on the RBS website! http://www.rbs.co.uk/Personal_Finances/Ways_to_bank_with_us/Mobile_Bank/history.htm --

Liam Mason

08:24, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Isn't the use of the phrase "no need to use a foreign language" clearly designed to be inflammatory in the first place? Lianachan 08:37, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

The Royal Bank of Scotland ( and some other banks as well ) use Gaelic versions of their names themselves. In fact il take a photo of one whenever i next have the misfortune to find myself back in the Hebrides as im sure i could find a place for it in one of the Gaelic related articles. siarach 00:18, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

The Bank of Scotland certainly uses Gaelic officially, and has until recently printed chequebooks with the Gaelic name Banca na h-Alba as a header. I had two or three of them, and I use a lowland branch. Brendandh 20:00, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

What do Scottish Wikipedians think about the following statement? Is it even true?

"What it has to do with is the law of arms in Scotland.....and so in Scotland is illegal" -as I have already stated to you once - wikipedia comes under the jurisdiction and laws of Florida - not Scotland - so it's use here at wikipedia is not illegal, and to state that it is intentionally misleading. The only laws that matter are the US Federal laws and Florida state laws - it is as simple as that. [[User:SFC9394|SFC9394]] 14:09, 11 September 2006 (UTC)"

81.158.166.153 16:01, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

The above deposit is by sockpuppeteer User:Mallimak. --Mais oui! 16:45, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's true as far as it goes. However, if someone in Scotland were to publish a print version of Wikipedia, that version would be bound by Scots law. It's the same issue as is raised by the "fair use" right. It may well be legal in Florida but it still adds a restriction to the (re-)use of Wikipedia in other jurisdictions. Hence the current drive to reduce the amount of "fair use" material as far as possible. Other laws may not matter from the point of view of the Wikimedia Foundation's legal liability but they do matter from the Point of view of maximising the global re-usability of the Wikipedia itself. -- Derek Ross | Talk 16:50, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Can anyone with the requisite knowledge or sources please respond to this IP query: Talk:Scotland Act 1978. They make a good point, and it would be nice to be able to remove the rather intrusive "contradiction" template from the top of the article itself. Ta. --Mais oui! 10:58, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

The order was tabelled in March, but not voted until July. I've updated the page accordingly. Source: The Holyrood Inquiry. Astrotrain 11:45, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I have just started (on 14 September 2006) a new page, Scottish Reformation. All contributions and advice gratefully received! I will slowly try to add to it, but any other help would be great! Slackbuie [- talk page]

I was about to say "surely we must have an article about that", but I can't find one. Once it's presentable, can you change the redir

Protestant Reformation in Scotland to it and make a main article link in History of Scotland#Protestant Reformation to it also. I also recommend you take a trip down to Ralph Slater and buy a pair of bigot-proof-underpants, as articles like this tend to attract more than their fair share of nutters (of all persuasions). -- Finlay McWalter | Talk

20:17, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for tackling this: it's a complex subject with influences from the English monarchy and the Scottish nobility that I'd not expected. I've a copy of Michael Lynch's 1991 Scotland – A New History which gives info on it, so will try to contribute but if our historians think that's out of date now please let me know! ..dave souza, talk 21:08, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your encouragement, guys (at least I think it was encouragement!). I too was amazed to discover this article didn't exist. The Reformation section of Scottish History is workmanlike, but it's pretty basic, and there's not a lot about the religious questions and changes in it, funnily enough! I like Michael Lynch's book and it would be a good starting point, and I think he also wrote the article on the Reformation in the Dictionary of Scottish History, but I'll check. I hadn't really thought about whether this would attract bigots and nutters (I am tooooo innocent!), but then this is the Internet after all! Some of us still live with the effects of the Scottish Reformation, so I can understand that people feel a bit precious about it all. But hopefully folk will try to stick to the facts we (think we) know. Even religion can be written about NPOV. After all it is only history and it all happened a long time ago... --Slackbuie 20:25, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

• Francis Mackenzie, 1st Baron Seaforth
• Lord Lieutenant of Ross-shire
• Mackenzie Baronets

could use a polish. - Kittybrewster 09:43, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

It's my understanding that Well dressing is also practiced in Ireland and Scotland. Does anyone have any reliable sources on this? If not, and if it's not appropriate to add any Scottish traditions to the Well dressing article, perhaps we need a Holy Wells article that can focus on Scottish and Irish holy well traditions, and possibly well-veneration traditions from other cultures. In this vein, I have started a Clootie article. --Kathryn NicDhàna 02:25, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it is (or at least it was). I don't know of any written sources for that though. It's just one of those common knowledge things that I know for some reason. I don't think that Clootie is a good name for an article though. In Scotland a cloot is a cloth and so a clootie is just a "small cloth". If anything it makes me think of clootie dumpling rather than clootie wells. So I think the article would be better entitled "clootie well".-- Derek Ross | Talk 03:51, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

I think clootie well does make more sense. I started it as clootie because I mentioned clooties on trees in another article, and there was nothing to link to. Maybe tomorrow I'll move it if I get a chance. --Kathryn NicDhàna 04:11, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Minor point: is it worth making clootie dumpling a redirect to clootie which now has a recipe? ..dave souza, talk 12:53, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I would say so. Although recipes should really be in the WikiBooks Cookbook. -- Derek Ross | Talk 17:56, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Ta. It's more of a description with a linked recipe, really. Any cooking's pretty much beyond my expertise, dumplings especially so :) ..dave souza, talk 00:02, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

"Sawney Bean" is now a redirect to

An entry from Findhorn Ecovillage appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on November 8, 2006. Ben MacDui Talk 16:20, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

On 18 November 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ben More Assynt. Ben MacDui (Talk) 17:49, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

On 29 November 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Thomas Livingston.

On 4 December 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Scone. Ben MacDui (Talk) 08:29, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

The greater world often has difficulty differentiating between Britain and England. In a similar vein there seems to be a problem with designating all historic Scots families/tribes as Clans. Albeit that 'Clan' is the Gaelic for "Children (of)..", historically only families, (not necessarily only Gaelic ones-Fraser, Forbes etc.), living north of the Highland line or Galloway used this term. In the Lowlands, it has historically aye been the "Name, House and following of xxxx": House of Bruce, House of Stewart, House of Hamilton, House of Douglas, House of Home, House of Hepburn etc. Rather like the universal use of the Rawlinson Philibeg, with military sourced doublets, (with or without the white socks!), it is dismaying to see that the majority of our historic Lallans names are being referred to in a way that caters to a misguided view of Scots heritage, and rather turns us into the proverbial shortbread tin. Can we have a discussion on renaming some of these 'Clan' pages, or would that upset our beloved American and Antipodean diaspora? --Brendandh 20:08, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Quite agree, I have been dismayed to find such artifacts as Clan Douglas, Clan Armstrong and Clan Hamilton, although mercifully House of Stuart is where it should be. I would support a reduction in Victoriana, moving some of these pages from 'Clan X' to 'House of X', or even 'X (family)' unless evidence can be shown that they were 'clans'. ::Supergolden:: 12:38, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm with you guys. Let's keep the

encyclopaedia

...

The tartanisation of Scotland, especially Scottish history, is in itself notable, and really does deserve a comprehensive, properly cited article, instead of the current stub (which I note is still carrying a cleanup tab). --Mais oui! 12:51, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

One more in agreement here. I've tried to bring the matter up several times at Talk:Scottish clan, to no avail. The reasoning is that apparently, the Lord Lyon makes no distinction between a family and a clan. I think that would be an appropriate place for this discussion. File:Icons-flag-scotland.png Canæn File:Icons-flag-scotland.png 05:31, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to bring it up at Talk:=Scottish clan, and I hope that some of you join me. File:Icons-flag-scotland.png Canæn File:Icons-flag-scotland.png 07:09, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Ive also cringed at the site of (dare i say, rather American?) highlandisation of seemingly EVERY scottish family into a 'Clan'. Im all for any action which aims at countering the daft "tartanisation" mentioned. siarach 00:29, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Clan has been used in the English of Scotland since English in Scotland starts appearing in the 14th century. The earliest appearance of the word in Scotland pertained to kinship groups in Buchan, in Lowland Scotland. In Scotland north-of-the-Forth clann began replacing the older Gaelic word cenél in the 12th century (if in fact it ever replaced it, since only Irish evidence is used to prove the previous popularity of cenél), but in Galloway the word cenél may have stayed in use for longer. There's a "lowland" use of the term in 1385 when Robert Stewart, Duke of Albany (hardly a "Lowlander" in any meaningful sense), was styled "capitalis legis de Clenmcduffe" chief of the law of Clann MacDuibh, the native comital kindred of eastern Fife. An act of parliament in 1587 calls border families such as the Elliots, Armstrongs, Scotts and Johnstones "clannis". These are just a few examples. Therefore, the statement "historically only families, (not necessarily only Gaelic ones-Fraser, Forbes etc.), living north of the Highland line or Galloway used this term" is a gross-oversimplification and extremely far from the truth. In fact, in my humble opinion, the idea of the Highland line, with absurdly exaggerated contrasting stereotypes thrown on either side, constitutes a greater historical distortion than the "tartanry" movement. It's an invention just as recent, but encounters less hostility amongst Scottish intellectuals because 1) the Teutonist movement was not aimed against it and 2) few Scottish "intellectuals" know anything about Scotland before the modern period. Tartanization, as meaning commercializing and simplifying Scottish history for a mass consumer audience, is just a local Scottish variation of a worldwide set of trends. Why some Scots "cringe" about it is beyond me; it happens everywhere, and people really aren't as stupid as the "cringe" makes them out to be. Anyways, as regards the clan pages ... that's what people call them; whether you think that's historically right or wrong is completely irrelevant. As far as I'm aware, wikipedia is not a platform to "de-tartanize" Scottish history. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 01:36, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

... and you make your point wonderfully, as always. Your resident non-intellectual, Mais oui! 10:33, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Calgacus covers this extremely well. It is nonsense to talk about Highlands and Lowlands in the middle ages, and there are ample references to clans in Galloway and the Borders, such as the curse of the Bishop of Glasgow on them. Unfortunately much of the time when people talk about "detartanising", it really means a kind of colonial cringe, something along the lines of the Indians in the Empire who dressed like Europeans, or the American blacks who despise their own culture and try to be as "white" as possible. --MacRusgail 15:26, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Anybody out there agree? Arranging the Scottish people stubs by surnames (or where historically appropriate their relevant toponym) would make finding one's subject matter easier. Big Job though! Brendandh 20:19, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

There is a campaign at the moment to redirect (in reality delete) BBC One Scotland to BBC One. I do not watch much telly, but from what I know it is a distinctive channel. Please contribute at:

• Talk:BBC One Scotland

--Mais oui! 10:35, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Hiya folks. For awhile now, I've been trying to get to the bottom of the issues surrounding the numbering of the Lords Lovat. The current Lord Lovat is always called the 18th Lord Lovat, but we've got him labelled Simon Fraser, 16th Lord Lovat, as that's what Burke's Peerage calls him. Well, the Lords Lovat seem to have about 4 titles which should be straightened out, and if you've got a knowledge of the workings of Scottish or British (or both) titles and heraldry and such, or if it just seems interesting, or you're a neutral mind, then please come on over. 66.81.182.59 07:09, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

That was me. File:Icons-flag-scotland.png Canæn File:Icons-flag-scotland.png

I wanted to draw attention to this category Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Scotland. some people here may be able to use it or fill some requests. To add an article to it add this {{reqphotoin|Scotland}} template to the Talk page GameKeeper 13:31, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Many thanks. That cat and template has been available since April, but if no-one ever tells us... :) --Mais oui! 14:06, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm hoping to submit

I am minded to move

Talk:Óengus I of the Picts. If you agree, disagree, or have anything to add, please speak up. Angus McLellan (Talk)

17:06, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't know enough about the wars of independence, but what I do know leads me to believe that Andrew Moray and Sir Andrew Murray are the same person. I'd appreciate if someone with more knowledge would investigate. File:Icons-flag-scotland.png Canæn File:Icons-flag-scotland.png 03:13, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Father and son, no ? Raymond Campbell Paterson contributed to them, and I'd think he knew what he was doing. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:07, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Again, I've little knowledge of the wars of independence. I hadn't heard of more than one Andrew Murrays being prominent leaders at the time, but it makes sense. I do wish the articles would be clarified, though. File:Icons-flag-scotland.png Canæn File:Icons-flag-scotland.png 03:19, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

This

Does anyone know how to represent the Scottish pronunciation of the surname Carnegie in IPA. It would be nice to include in the Andrew Carnegie article. --Mais oui! 10:14, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I'd say it like this, /k/ɑː/ɾ/n/eɪ/g/ɪ/ though I have heard more than one pronounciation within scotland. Rincewind42 13:42, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

For those interested in biography and/or architecture/local history, I have just come across this excellent academic resource:

• Dictionary of Scottish Architects, University of St Andrews and Arts and Humanities Research Council

Very useful indeed for starting missing articles and for providing citations/lists/external links etc. for existing ones.

I found it because I noted that we do not have a James Souttar article yet.--Mais oui! 11:15, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

This is indeed a great resource. Can't wait til they expand it beyond the current 1840-1940 range! ::Supergolden:: 09:30, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I have nominated

I found mention of MacFie as an Armigerous clan. I think the current Macfie page should be moved to the correct spelling, then maybe someone will see it and add to it. (-- unsigned by Rincewind42)

Hmmm. Definitely a strange spelling. Yep. Let's move it to McPhee where it belongs. -- Derek Ross | Talk 06:20, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Ho, hum, MacFie or McPhee? They may be different and in this case I would have thought the former. Ben MacDui Talk 08:09, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

I have moved it to

MacFie and tided up the language; I cannot vouch for the content. It would ideally have a stub mark, but every other clan I checked on had a reasonable amount of information displayed and not being familiar with stubs I left it alone. Awake ye MacPhees! Ben MacDui Talk

09:23, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I see now that to be consistent with the Scottish clans category it should be 'Clan MacFie'. However, now that it sticks out like a sore thumb on the category page perhaps someone with the requisite knowledge will move it along. Ben MacDui Talk 09:29, 14 November 2006 (UTC) (All the above copied to MacFie talk page.)

A minor edit war occured over at that article some time ago (see "Gaelic: "no need to use a foreign language"" above), over the use of the Gaelic name. It has broken out again, with some rather unfortunate heated language being recycled. If anyone can diseminate more light than heat, feel free...

The spirit of 3RR is being broken, if not the actual law. --Mais oui! 20:26, 13 November 2006 (UTC)