Talk:Scottish Government

message: Are the Lord Advocate and Solicitor-General appointed from outside the Parliament, as neither Elish Angiolini nor Colin Boyd are listed on Members of the Scottish Parliament, 2003-2007?
:Yes.  The way it works, off the top of my head, is that they *may* be an MSP, but that as their jobs are fairly specialist, it is unlikely that they could be filled from the pool of MSPs.  Therefore, they can be appointed from the outside.  Maybe someone who knows exactly should add it into the article. Maccoinnich 13:13, Mar 15, 2005 (UTC)
The Scotland Act 1998 provides for the Lord Advocate and Solicitor General for Scotland to be appointed by the Queen on the recommendation of the First Minister. They must resign in the event of a "no confidence" vote in the Scottish Parliament. The Act also permits them to sit in the Parliament and participate in its proceedings (if they are not MSPs) but not to vote.  In the past, those appointed to law officer posts were either MPs or had strong political affilitations (in which case they were elevated to the House of Lords). The appointment of Elish Angiolini as Sol Gen reflects a move away from political appointment.--George Burgess 13:53, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lord Advocate and Solicitor-General 

message: Could someone who knows a bit more about the subject have a look at the list of departments in the UK civil service in Scotland section.  The education department link takes you to the Hong Kong education department and the Justice Department link takes you to the US department.  We only seem to have an article for the environment department.  I'd be inclined to redo all the links in line with the environment department one so that when we get articles on each department,  hopefully the links will be pointing in the right place.  Does anybody have any thoughts?  RicDod 16:05, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of Departments 

message: Instead of edit warring over the description for the coat of arms could we possibly discuss a compromise?  I personally think that the description is fairly interesting and would be useful for the reader and should be included. The royal coat of arms which in one version is on the page twice should only be on the page once.  Perhaps we could have a separate section for discussion of the coat of arms.  This may unbalance the article slightly, but the article needs expanding, so over time this shouldn't be an issue.  RicDod 13:05, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Agree with RicDod. The removal of the detailed description and obfuscation of the true nature of the UK Arms is not justified. --Mais oui! 18:18, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

text: *Thanks Astrotrain, I hadn't realised that this was discussed in another article.  It would make more sense to me, to only have the discussion in one place with links in from other relevant articles.  If there was a brief note in the caption to the Scottish executive arms explaining that there were differences and a link to the relevant discussion would this be OK for everyone? RicDod 19:21, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Except that what Astrotrain failed to tell you was that there is not a detailed description of the difference between the SE Arms and the UK Arms at that article. --Mais oui! 19:37, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit war over description of coat of arms 

message: I noticed that the BBC has begun using the term Government  instead of Executive.  Has there been a name change? Regan123 19:39, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think there has been some change on the news it was reported that the civil service are to refer to the term Scottish government rather than executive. --Barryob   Vigeur de dessus  19:51, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The BBC notably used the term in lowercase - 'Scottish government' rather than 'Scottish Government'. The Scottish Executive remains the legal term and the one still used in all formal dealings. --Breadandcheese 14:49, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Quite possibly, after all the two terms are almost synonymous - it's exceptionally possibly that Irish and Scots Gaelic would not have different terms to translate the two. --Breadandcheese 14:49, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Executive looks set to be fully rebranded next week  --Barryob  Vigeur de dessus 12:08, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  It has already started (see )- sign changed at Victoria Quay. Astrotrain 12:54, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think this article should now be moved to Scottish Government, given the official name change. Legally the body will continue to be known as the Scottish Executive, but all the signs and letterheads will now say Scottish Government, wikipedia should reflect this change. Abc30 17:43, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, I have made a request at WP:RM --Barryob  Vigeur de dessus 18:06, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, given the alteration in circumstance I must agree this is sensible notwithstanding my previous objection. --Breadandcheese 21:38, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I strongly disagree, it's just a cheap attempt at back-door independence.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.110.6.54 (talk) 07:38, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Government or Executive? 

message: I suspect these arms are not in fact "former" - but would be the present arms of the Scottish Government, just not incorporated into the logo anymore. --Breadandcheese 01:26, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've tried to clarify. Doops |  talk 02:32, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Former" arms? 

message: In trying to clean up Finance and Sustainable Growth Directorate, I was looking for references. I couldn't find any reference to a department with this eact name on the SG website, and I note that the reference on Finance and Central Services Department is broken. Further, the SG website has a page on the Greener Scotland Directorate , not mentioned in our template. I am concerned that the directorates are not accurately represented on WP, and would like someone with a bit more knowledge to check this out and confirm with references and working links. Thanks, Jonathan Oldenbuck 09:34, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah sorry I didn't realise --Barryob  (Contribs) (Talk) 00:46, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks George for your helpful explanation. Obviously the restructuring has been fairly far-reaching, but I am still unsure how we represent this on WP. The template  would now appear to be completely inaccurate if not misleading. An article for each of 40 odd directorates does seem like overkill - perhaps a separate page on Directorates of the Scottish Government to cover tham all? The section on "United Kingdom Civil Service in Scotland" also seems to give more prominence to the old departments than to the new directorates. I will raise this at WP:SCOWNB to get a wider view. Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 10:30, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Seeing as it was me who created the miss I will attempt to fix it but I am unsure who to group the directorates I was thinking on going by the cabinet portfolio eg Justice and Communities Directorates, Rural Affairs and Environment Directorates ect --Barryob  (Contribs) (Talk) 14:00, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

text: I understand but is there a list of the Directorates General the Scottish Gov website only lists the Directors General  so just group them under the Director General Directorate General Education ect --Barryob  (Contribs) (Talk) 19:50, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you read the article, you'd know that what is called a 'Cabinet Secretary' in the Scottish government is the equivalent of a 'Secretary of State' in the British government. What is meant is that Scottish 'Cabinet Secretaries' do not lead directorates in the way that the Home Secretary runs the Home Office. RGloucester  — ☎ 15:16, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've made an attempt to clarify this. How does it look now? RGloucester  — ☎ 15:30, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Directorates 

message: I think this page should be moved to Scottish Executive as that is its official/legal name according to Section 44 of the Scotland Act 1998 and a name change to Scottish Government would require a new act of Parliament. Views. Rahowell (talk) 23:17, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Scottish Government is the name used by the identity itself, so the article should stay where it is per WP:COMMONNAME. The introduction clearly explains the origins of the entity. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 12:03, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

text: The Executive will legally be renamed Government as a result of the new Scotland bill so this will finally end this pointless debate. --Barryob  (Contribs) (Talk) 03:23, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page Move 

message: I think the section on the Cabinet is misleading, it suggests that all the Ministers are in the Cabinet, but my understanding is that it is just the FM, DFM and Cabinet Secretaries, and possibly one or two others. 
Tallmanbaby (talk) 20:26, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cabinet membership 

message: What is the this reference "Scots: Scots Govrenment" in the lead-in? I don't know a single person in the Scotland I inhabit who says "govrenment" when they mean "government" (and say "goverment", like most speakers of English). This really is illiterate tosh. Also, given that the overwhelming population of Scotland speaks standard English or Scots, why is Gaelic given precedence in the sequence? There really are all kinds of hidden agendas at work here. Kim Traynor (talk) 21:26, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this just a typo? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Scottish Government. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110605141228/http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/officialReports/meetingsParliament/or-10/sor0225-02.htm to http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/officialReports/meetingsParliament/or-10/sor0225-02.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:25, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Substituted at 01:15, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Scottish Government. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131014213042/http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/visitandlearn/9981.aspx to http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/visitandlearn/9981.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:06, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: On 26 June the First Minister announced changes to her ministerial team, and a number of editors began to edit relevant Wikipedia articles to reflect these changes. I edited the Cabinet secretaries and ministers section of this article to include the new ministers' names. However, in my view, this editing was premature, and I wanted to make a note of my reasoning for this in order to prevent issues in future. The Scotland Act 1998, ss47 and 49, provides that before appointing ministers the First Minister must have the approval of the Scottish Parliament and Her Majesty. Therefore, the announcement by the First Minister was only a proposal and these people did not become ministers on this date. The nominees were always liable to change before they were officially appointed and, as it happened, Gillian Martin was dropped before the Parliament gave its agreement to the rest of the ministers today (28 June). Therefore, although it was only for a period of two days, the new ministers' articles should not have been edited, or should have been edited to name them "proposed" or "future" ministers. jamacfarlane (talk) 15:01, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: As one who also jumped in to start updating things, I agree with the point, and will certainly refrain from making changes in future until they have been confirmed by Parliament.Grinner (talk) 20:32, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

text: I agree parlimentary approval isn't required in those cases, as moving portfolio is only an administrative matter (I didn't consider that in my post). However, I assume the FM would not have moved existing ministers before the new ones were confirmed, e.g. if Michael Matheson was appointed to transport, infrastructure and connectivity before Humza Yousaf was confirmed, then the justice brief would be vacant for a period. However, I've just read your bio on your user page and realise you will know more on the subject than me, so correct me if this isn't the case. jamacfarlane (talk) 13:51, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reshuffle 2018 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:
*  (discussion)
*  (discussion)
*  (discussion)
*  (discussion)
*  (discussion)
*  (discussion)
*  (discussion)
*  (discussion)
*  (discussion)
*  (discussion)
*  (discussion)
*  (discussion)
*  (discussion)
*  (discussion)
Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:20, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:04, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:
*  ()
*  ()
*  ()
Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:57, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:23, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion