Wikipedia talk:Scottish Wikipedians' notice board/Archive 6

message: Please see this query at the IWNB:
*
--Mais oui! 18:43, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Oisín]] and [[Ossian]] 

message: We have a "new" user, User:No More POV Please, who is going around POV pushing on Gaelic related articles. The crux of his POV pushing is Gaelic being synonymous with Irish. He is certainly a version of a previous user, as he knows too much about wiki culture to be otherwise. It'll be worthwhile to keep an eye on his Contribution History. - Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 00:47, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[User:No More POV Please]] 

message: I am working towards uploading a decent .png image for each of the Unitary Authorities. I've done a few and put them in :Category:Scottish council logos. I note that some of them are already in the relevant geo-stub templates, so I'll add more in as I do them. BTW if there are any other council logos floating around please put them in this category. Thanks, ::Supergolden:: 15:26, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: These logos are fair use, so should not be used on stub templates (or any other templates). They should only be used on the article about the relevant council. I'm sure a better free image can be found that represents each area for the stub templates. --Vclaw 15:36, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What about coats of arms though? I note that all the England geo stubs use coats of arms on the stub template, not logos? Eg see , ,  and . --Mais oui! 15:44, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Council Logos 

message: left|thumb|150px|1st Battalion, Black Watch soldiers in a Hong Kong military ceremony in 1994.
Thank goodness: a little light relief! Someone bunged this on the Kilt article. I vote for it to stay!
--Mais oui! 11:01, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a good photo but I think the problem is that it's copyright and the copyright owner has not given us permission to use it on Wikipedia nor to release it under the GFDL. -- Derek Ross | Talk 16:37, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Joie de vivre 

message: The good folks at British History Online have just put A Topographical Dictionary of Scotland (Samuel Lewis, 1846) online here. Some villages are just a couple of lines of bare factual information, but some (especially parishes near large cities, such as Gilmerton or Newhaven) get decent articles. The level of coverage for large towns seems good, and the cities go into great detail.
It's a hundred and sixty years old, of course, so not something to base an article on - but it looks excellent for fleshing out "history of..." sections in articles on towns and villages. Shimgray | talk | 01:36, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ta for that. Looks very good. --Mais oui! 01:45, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Another resource would be the Old (1791–1799) and New (1834–1845) Statistical Accounts  here. For example, the Old Statistical Account report for Kilchoman on Islay includes such interesting trivia as this: "The Highland dress has not made such rapid progress among us, as with our neighbours to the N. We are more clad in the long coat, hat, and breeches, than the inhabitants of any other of the Hebrides." It also tells us that sheep were as yet uncommon, and that raising black cattle still took second place to horse breeding for the Irish markets. The minister of Kilchoman doesn't mention the water of life, but his neighbour in Kildalton is indignant over the great amount of whisky distilled. Apparently there wasn't a single excise man on Islay in the 1790s.  Lucky for some. Angus McLellan  (Talk) 15:41, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  An excellent historic resource 

message: It has been discovered on  WP:RFCU that , , , ,  , , and  are all socks.  has been engaging in sockpuppetry to further the wikipedian strength of his POV on Scottish and Irish related articles. All except Bluegold have been permanently blocked, and Bluegold himself has been blocked for 24 hours. Moreover,  is a suspected sock, but may be just, if Bluegold was telling the truth on the investigation page, Bluegold's work colleague trying to help him out. - Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 20:03, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confirmed Sockpuppetry on Scotland-related articles 

message: Please see discussion at Template talk:PoliticsScotland. --Mais oui! 10:49, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Which image: Flag of Scotland or Royal Arms of the United Kingdom?

message: Is the use of the council area name really useful, or merely misleading? As if it isn't bad enough seeing a sign on Drummochter saying "Welcome to the Highlands", the Highlands are a) far larger than Highland region (Highland Perthshire/Aberdeenshire/Banffshire, Argyll etc), and b) actually do not include certain areas within Highland (Caithness) - or the Hebrides, which are sometimes included... For this reason, "natives of Highland" is bound to be confused with "Highlander" which is a completely different concept. Why must we always follow the penpushers? (Putting Banff in Aberdeenshire is another of their abominations) --MacRusgail 21:24, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed. Couldn't have put it more eloquently. I just can't see what other way there is to do it. It's a tough one. However, it's not like "Highlander" is a very meaningful concept in the 21st century. I suppose the current system is just the best of a bad world. How about, natives by Mormaerdom? ;) - Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 21:37, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Erm, I know some Highlanders who would think it was very much so. The traditional counties are still in widespread colloquial use, with the exception of those with big cities in the middle. The changes are often made by officials with little understanding of regional identities, and/or geopolitics. And probably to keep the Labour party in or out, in some cases! --MacRusgail 22:02, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Indeed, I as well know some Highlanders who take great pride in their heritage, and keep it alive to this day in the form of a small grouping of Frasers, who actually act as a Clan. Just another bit of non-useful information, without any actual input on the tehcnical discussion from me. Canæn 08:25, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I actually am a Highlander who thinks it is very much so. In this I am far from unique.  Most Highlanders I know, if not actually all of them, share this view. Lianachan 13:42, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Highland and Highlands 

message: Any well-sourced Scottish-related phrases suitable for this article?
*Common phrases based on stereotypes
--Mais oui! 13:47, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Common phrases based on stereotypes 

message: I have been expecting this for a while now, but my first reaction is: "Oh my god... do we really have to?"
Aird Primary School should probably be sent to AFD for their consideration. Personally I do not know what to think. As an inclusionist, I am tempted to just ignore it, but I thought I had better seek the wise counsel of my fellow Scottish Wikipedians. --Mais oui! 05:57, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ISTR that school articles hardly ever get voted down on AFD. Consider WP:SCH. --Craig Stuntz 12:41, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Primary schools? 

message: While the SCOWNB isn't neccessarily a "wikiproject" per say, I encourage you all to tak a look at this: CommonsTicker. It seems to be like a stock ticker, with information pertinent to individual wikiprojects, regarding related images. Further than that, I've no idea what the bluidy hell the man's talking about. Canæn 08:18, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  CommonsTicker 

message: I've created the following stub for use with Scottish clans and related articles. You can use it by putting  at the bottom of an article. Hopefully this will help facilitate not only the organizing of Scottish clans, but also the construction, as we'll be able to see which ones desire more attention than others. Granted, right now it seems more will be on the stub list than not.  Canæn  19:58, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template:Clan stub 

message: Not that I'm in any way unhappy with our existing doton maps, but (inspired by the neato map at 2006 FIFA World Cup#Venues) I've come up with the following:
Is this something we should be doing, either on Scotland or other places? -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 21:47, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Impressive! That's definitely worth having. -- Derek Ross | Talk 22:00, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow! I had no idea that was possible in wikipedia. Great work Finlay - I can see how this might be used on the Unitary Authority areas and county maps? ::Supergolden:: 10:13, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent: we definitely need new local government maps: the current county ones are awful, and often totally inaccurate. --Mais oui! 20:21, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

text:  That's a cool piece of code.  It could be used to create location maps for the infoboxes and save the bother of having to create and upload separate ones for each place.  SFC9394 11:00, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Clickable map(s)

message: I believe members of this political group are using its wikipedia page for propaganda and I'd be very grateful to anyone who knows about the history of Scottish "ultra-nationalism" and is willing to do a decent NPOV rewrite that cites sources. Thanks.
IslaySolomon 04:02, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Siol nan Gaidheal]] NPOV problems 

message: Hi all.
I just got a nice letter from a chap at Holyrood, pointing out that our articles on various areas of Scotland have a little box for MSPs, but usually only list the directly-elected ones, not the list members. eg/ North Ayrshire, which is in two constituencies and two regions - so we list two of the sixteen MSPs.
It would be silly to list them all, IMO - it'd unbalance the infobox and make it look like each MSP represents about twelve people and a dog - but would it be worth having something like, say...
 MPs     Katy Clark
         Brian Donohoe
 MSPs    Irene Oldfather
         Allan Wilson
         South of Scotland list MSPs
         West of Scotland list MSPs
Thoughts appreciated. Shimgray | talk | 22:09, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Your solution to the problem makes sense – about the only suggestion I could add would be to have "(directly elected)" on the end of the two named MSP's, but I don't know if that is just adding extra info we don't really need.  I thought there were plans floating about to scrap the whole list system anyway?  The thoughts being that it leaves a load of MSP's with no direct constituents, and is partially undemocratic (unsuccessful direct election party candidates are always at the top of their parties list, so almost always get in anyway). SFC9394 23:50, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Haven't heard anything about that... Furthermore, there are lots of functional democracies which work without constituencies. The Scottish/New Zealandish/German system of having constituencies *and* lists gives you the best of both worlds, as there are directly elected MSPs from constituencies as well as a proportional representation through the additiona list seats; only having constituencies makes the system extremely undemocratic, as can be seen in the United Kingdom's general election, where parties with barely a third of the electoral votes get more than half of the mandates... —Nightstallion (?) 11:21, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:    Looks like it will happen after the 2007 elections - with an STV being the only change this time around, but it sounds like there are folks who want it to go. SFC9394 11:43, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Okay, I'll add these in the next couple of days if there are no objections. Shimgray | talk | 00:34, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, please do make this change. An MSP is and MSP regardless of how they are elected. I have found that people are pretty savvy about this. The system means that you have a choice of who can represent you, so if someone has a case they want to take up with an MSP they will quite often go to one of the Regional List MSPs rather than their constituency MSP. When the Scottish Parliament started, some of the consituency MSPs got a bit miffed about this, but after all the Regional MSP is also representing you, albeit representing your region rather than your area than the constituency. So they ought to be listed somehow in these articles. --Slackbuie 09:47, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  MSPs 

message: Please see Talk:Acts of Union 1707. Could the historians amongst us please provide the relevant information. In fact, that whole article is extremely thin and ropey and could do with the input of some experts. --Mais oui! 01:45, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've chopped parts of the "violations" section up, and will attack the last one when I feel up to it. It does seem a bit stringy, on the whole... Shimgray | talk | 23:37, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ta. With the three hundred year anniversary co-inciding with the Scottish Parliament general election next year, this is going to be a big area of interest soon. It would be nice if Wikipedia had a half-decent series of articles for the general public to refer to. --Mais oui! 08:47, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation needed 

message: The Right of public access to the wilderness needs some input from informed Scottish Wikipedians. At the moment the traditional Scottish rights are just briefly mentioned as an afterthought, and the article would certainly benefit from some references or citations. --Mais oui! 04:10, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Right of public access to the wilderness 

message: The Exchequer article has barely a peep about the Scottish Exchequer: can anyone take a look at it? --Mais oui! 15:05, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Some useful stuff at the National Archives of Scotland Guide to Exchequer Records maybe. Angus McLellan  (Talk) 23:52, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exchequer 

message: There has been a bit of a low level edit war going on at Jim Clark. If this is within your field of expertise, or if you can contribute some good references, please contribute at Talk:Jim Clark. --Mais oui! 05:51, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jim Clark 

message: I'm working on the Education Act 1696 article at the moment, but I don't wanna put it on the main namespace until it's a decent article. I feel it's a topic important enough to merit something beyond a stub. I've only managed to piece together a tiny amount from Google and need either to work offine or find somewhere online with enough contemporary data to be worth it.
Are old Parliament of Scotland laws kept online anywhere? If not... is there anywhere in the Glasgow area that would have decent resources of this nature? Cheers. 20:19, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Mitchell Library on North Street seems to be the main central library, and poking their catalogue they seem to have a decent reference section. I'd advise going there and asking as your first port of call. Shimgray | talk | 20:57, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where to find 1696 legislation? 

message: Please see the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Regional notice boards#A uniform naming scheme. Zocky | picture popups 00:52, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Standard naming scheme 

message: Please see the discussion at Category talk:Orcadian Wikipedians#Scandinavian too?. Thanks/wangi 13:15, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orcadian Wikipedians - Scandinavian too? 

message: Image:Gaelic 1400-1500.JPG
* Can someone make a better version of this . Wiki needs it, and I don't have good programs. However, if no-one does do, I will do and wiki will get a crap map :). Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 15:50, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map request 

message: Please see the discussion here:
*Talk:List_of_monarchs_of_Scotland#Direct_descent_from_Fergus_M.C3.B3r_to_Elizabeth_II
--Mais oui! 10:28, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Direct descent from Fergus Mór to Elizabeth II]] 

message: I'm currently working on a script intended to create short articles on political parties on a variety of wikipedias simultaneously. However, in order for the technique to work I need help with translations to various languages. If you know any of the languages listed at User:Soman/Lang-Help , then please help by filling in the blanks. For example I need help with Scottish Gaelic. Thanks, --Soman 12:14, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help with translations 

message: I am beginning to think that the Scottish Wikipedians' notice board is not the best vehicle for pushing up the quality of the Scotland article (we ought to try to get it to WP:FA, in order to get into Wikipedia:Version 0.5, or, failing that, Wikipedia:Version 1.0), and the other key Scottish articles. It is becoming increasingly obvious to me that we really ought to start up the long-mooted WikiProject Scotland.
Most of the stuff at the notice board (at least on the bottom half) is actually WikiProject material anyway, and the Talk page is really being used as a WikiProject talk already! The notice board should be just that: for bunging up brief notices and signposts. I am thinking of launching a Wikiproject and correspondingly radically clearing out, and chopping down, the noticeboard (a re-launch if you like). The Scotland Portal concept is fine (but currently mediocre/undynamic content), but in stasis: it needs a good kick up the jacksie. 
For comparison, have a look at:
*Wikipedia:WikiProject Norway
*Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia
*Wikipedia:WikiProject New Zealand
*Wikipedia:WikiProject Peru
*Wikipedia:WikiProject Hong Kong
*etc.
And, if you are at a loose end, have a look at:
*Wikipedia:Version 0.5 Nominations
*Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Nominations
*Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/WPPlaces
*Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Medieval Scotland articles by quality
*Wikipedia:WikiProject
*Wikipedia:WikiProject/Best practices
Thoughts? Please express them here. --Mais oui! 08:59, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Scotland|WikiProject Scotland]] 

message: Hi folks, I've just been rather surprised to see that the Aberdeen local authority page (formerly Aberdeen City, although perhaps overdue for renaming to City of Aberdeen) has been "merged" with the article on Aberdeen itself. This is contrary to the style of the Edinburgh / City of Edinburgh, Glasgow / City of Glasgow and Dundee / City of Dundee articles, plus it leaves Aberdeenshire without its natural partner. There is also no article with the appropriate map showing the local authority area (the blue one) and we've lost the list of names of MSPs.
I'm not suggesting any vandalism has taken place, because all the work seems entirely sincere. However, the user who proposed this seems (from my reading of history and diff pages) to have just started a vote (in the Talk:Aberdeen City page) a week ago, without adding "merge" tags anywhere, and now gone ahead and made the changes without any votes being cast either way.
I feel a bit of input from regular editors might be helpful before I lumber in with size 12 boots and revert anything. – Kieran T (talk | contribs) 19:51, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Makes sense to keep the discussion at Talk:Aberdeen#Merge in content from Aberdeen City?. Thanks/wangi 20:38, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Absolutely. Just drawing your attention to it. :) – Kieran T (talk | contribs) 23:48, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sudden and radical change to "Aberdeen City" / "City of Aberdeen" 

message: I'm doing some work on the Y Gododdin article, and need a good map showing the locations of the various kingdoms in southern Scotland in the 6th-7th centuries. At the moment I'm using the map copied from Skene, which is not easy to read even when enlarged. I *think* I have seen a better map somewhere on Wikipedia, but I've checked various related topics and can't find it. Can anybody help? Rhion 09:16, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A Google Images search brings up , not too detailed, but easy to read and attractive-looking. Lurker oi! 14:36, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not the one I saw, but this one will do nicely. Thanks.Rhion 16:44, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gododdin/Votadini and neighbouring kingdoms