Talk:Orkney

message: As hard as it might be for people to imagine, the existence of Orkney as fundamentally part of Scotland is about to become incredibly politicised due to the Scottish independence debate. I strongly advocate locking the article until well after the terms of separation are settled to avoid Wikipedia being used as a political football.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.36.57.163 (talk) 04:02, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lock article in run up to and aftermath of Scottish independence vote 

message: I've always found it difficult to follow trends from a column of numbers, and I'm probably not the only one. So I made a graph and added it to §Overview of population trends.
I couldn't figure out how to get it placed nicely in wikicode, or in the wikitable that the numbers are already in, so I used plain HTML, which seems to have worked properly. --Thnidu (talk) 04:18, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Population 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Orkney. 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/20150713011232/http://getamap.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/getamap/frames.htm to http://getamap.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/getamap/frames.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140528053110/http://www.forestry.gov.uk/forestry/INFD-6UFE3Y to http://www.forestry.gov.uk/forestry/INFD-6UFE3Y
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130729230722/http://www.snptacticalvoting.com/2009/10/untouchable-orkney-shetland-isles.html to http://www.snptacticalvoting.com/2009/10/untouchable-orkney-shetland-isles.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140304095849/http://www.alba.org.uk/scot99constit/h05.html to http://www.alba.org.uk/scot99constit/h05.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20111005153021/http://www.ensg.gov.uk/assets/kel003110000.pdf to http://www.ensg.gov.uk/assets/kel003110000.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120911225847/http://www.clackson.com:80/tartan/sanday-tartan.htm to http://www.clackson.com/tartan/sanday-tartan.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 08:49, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Watch hereLPF plod (talk) 18:12, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Video 

message: All those acting in good faith  are welcome to participate in the discussion of this proposal of course. However, it is my suspicion that there is an element of ‘sock-puppetry’ going on at present. Please read WP:SOCK if you don’t know what I mean  - although I am sure most of you do. I am no stranger to sock investigations and please be advised that:
#accounts participating in this discussion with no previous editing history other than edit warring on this article in the period since January 18 2018 will have their remarks struck.
#any account  participating in this discussion that I suspect to be a sock-puppet or ‘meat-puppet’ will be reported at WP:SPI where, if found guilty, they can expect to receive a block.
*Support as nominator. Ben MacDui 11:32, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Legitimacy

message: Please see Talk:Shetland#Conflicting information (Christian I of Norway) for an apparent contradiction between the two articles.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  05:40, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflicting information (Christian I of Norway) 

message: The Picts are a historical riddle. How to assert they spoke Brythonic? --Manfariel (talk) 20:31, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Have you looked at the Pictish language article? Mikenorton (talk) 21:09, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picts 

message: In the article introduction, a statement on the islands reads: 
'The climate is mild...'
Later, in the 'Absorbed by Scotland' section, we read:
'The harsh climate of Orkney and the Orcadian reputation...'
Then later in 'Climate' appears:
'Orkney has a cool temperate climate that is remarkably mild and steady for such a northerly latitude...'  — Preceding unsigned comment added by RobotBoy66 (talk • contribs) 00:25, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Well you make a good point. Perhaps different editors have different experiences of climate. I think "a cool temperate climate that is remarkably mild and steady for such a northerly latitude..." is a reasonable description from the perpective of say Finland, but I can't imagine too many visitors from the tropics thinking that the winters were anything less than harsh. However, that is no excuse for inconsistency & I'll have a go at fixing this. Ben MacDui 10:51, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: It's worth noting that the harsh climate refers to the 17th century, which was during the Little Ice Age climate minimum, so that may explain it. Mikenorton (talk) 11:01, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: "Harsh weather" often refers to wind. +1°C and hard wind is generally not so nice.--BIL (talk) 11:12, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I’m guessing the qualifier in one of the quotes “for such a northerly latitude” probably is the reason. It’s relatively mild for that latitude , which is still harsh!DeCausa (talk) 12:19, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

text: Just seen Edit which fixes it along these lines. DeCausa (talk) 12:24, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Climate Contradiction 

message: This article was first written getting on for 20 years ago. What does 'Today' mean in this context, and why is the page still a GA?  Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:59, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I read “today” as the day the reader reads it, whenever that happens to be. I would assume most others would read it the same way as WP is a constantly edited digital, not paper, encyclopaedia. But I guess your point is that it is unclear. There is probably a better way of expressing it but at the two points were the term is used any alternative would make little difference. (St Magnus has been a dominating feature of Kirkwall for the last 700 years. I don’t see that changing any time soon but if it were to, someone, no doubt, would update the sentence.) I don’t know anything about the article’s history so can’t comment on “why is the page still a GA”. DeCausa (talk) 07:53, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

text: I don't have anything to add to  DeCausa's comments re 'today'. As for its GA status at a very quick glance I'd say some of the Norse history could maybe emphasise the nature of the primary sources, the tiny 'Demographics' section is very questionable and the population trends section does not look great. Suggestions welcome of course. Ben MacDui 16:33, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Today' 

message: The article leaves out the obvious etymology — from Latin orcus which spawned the modern word orc. Is there a reason that was dismissed out of hand?--Jack Upland (talk) 08:37, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: ”Dismissed out of hand” suggests it was previously discussed. I don’t think it was. The reason why it wasn’t previously discussed is probably because no reliable source has put it forward. The reason why no reliable source has put it forward is probably because it’s baseless. DeCausa (talk) 21:54, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orcs? 

message: I read the article which I found useful. I made some fixes and improvements. I also reorganized text and images. I have some comments.
1. The introducing paragraph in the etymology section is not very elegant. It also makes references to Mela and Pliny that should be placed in the intro at the right time in the right sequence rather than being mentioned towards the end of the introductory passage.
2. In the section about the absorption of Orkney by Scotland I see two paragraphs that talk about the 17th century (which I inverted since one spans into the 19th century with "1830" so it should be the second in the sequence). I suppose the two paragraphs could be fused into a single paragraph.
3. The table with the historical population shows an increment of 1.04% of the population between 2001 and 2011. The math does not add up.
4. The section that says "The Scottish National Party chose not to contest the seat to give the movement a "free run". Their candidate, John Goodlad, came 4th with 3,095 votes, 14.5% of those cast, but the experiment has not been repeated." does not clearly explain what's the issue and it should be rephrased to do so. As a reader who is not familiar with local politics it's hard to understand and interpret the passage.
5. The article mentions that there are at least three tartans for Orkney and one of them is specifically for Sanday. It would be nice to add an image of each one of them.
ICE77 (talk) 06:32, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comments on the article 

message: I see this topic has reared its head again. As far as I can see the use of "The Orkneys" is not used by modern authorities (by which I mean those such as the Ordnance Survey, the Royal Mail, Haswell-Smith (2004), Thomson (2008), Omand (2003), the local authority et.c) but rather in old sources such as the one dated 1883 in the current lead section, "The Orkneys and Schetland" in Blaeu's Atlas Novus of 1654, or in relatively non-authoritative texts. To quote one overview of this topic "'The Orkneys' is now, perhaps thankfully, out of fashion...". I shall have a go at modifying the current version asap. Ben MacDui 16:42, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: "Orkeny Islands" is used by the OS for both the island group and council area but the lieutenancy area is just "Orkney". I agree the plural form isn't correct though I'd ask if this should be moved to "Orkney Islands" though it was discussed back in 2018. Crouch, Swale (talk)  17:08, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

text: Are the BBC Time Out or Politico archaic? Of course, recent WP:RS use it. No one's saying predominant use isn't Orkney but saying recent RS don't use it all just isn't true. This is only an altname after all. I don't see what the problem is. DeCausa (talk) 18:18, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

text: I wouldn't call Winter Watch or Time Out 'authorities' on this subject myself. For whatever reason it is conisdered to be "wrong" in much the same way that we don't refer to "The Shetlands". It wouldn't be hard to find references to "Dublin City" or "London Town" which are also only altnames but they don't get prominence on the relevant articles. I could add a longer note about this. Ben MacDui 20:47, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: "Authorities"? I'm not sure what you mean by that. Altnames are simply that - alternative names. They don't have to be 'authoritative'. It seems to me that you think a name being "wrong" in some sense means it can't be an altname. That's just not the case. "Holland" is "wrong" but it doesn't stop it being an altname for The Netherlands. All that needs to be established is usage in RS - which I have shown. (Not sure why you refer to Winter watch - it's the BBC that publishes that webpage.) Here's more: The Spectator, The Times, and The Guardian. Btw, I see no reason why "The Shetlands" shouldn't be an altname - The Telegraph has this headline a couple of weeks ago: "Britain to join space race in 2024 with rockets taking off from the Shetlands". Excluding The Orkneys, or The Shetlands as altnames seems to fly in the face of real world usage for the sake of WP:RGW. DeCausa (talk) 23:59, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: By “authorities” I mean people who are familiar with the topic and write extensively about it as opposed to copy editors and journalists who probably couldn’t find the place on a map. If you want to use the BBC as evidence then a better bet would be actual news articles about Orkney such as    .They don’t use this altname because they know if they did they would receive complaints – as indeed do we. Wikipedia has a duty not to perpetuate error as opposed to blindly repeating it. For example, although it is easy to find RS mentions of e.g. "The King of England" we don't embolden this word as an altname for the UK. Instead we have a sentence buried under "Etymology and terminology" that says "The word England is occasionally used incorrectly to refer to the United Kingdom as a whole, a mistake principally made by people from outside the UK." Something along those lines could be added here although the wording would have to be chosen carefully. Ben MacDui 13:52, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not comparable. "King of England" is factually wrong - wrong realm. "Orkneys" is a style which is deprecated, particularly by its inhabitants, because of the implications it carries not because it is "factually" incorrect (other than it is not accepted as the legitimate name). But even so, we have the Holland/Netherlands example I already gave.   And of course the BBC usually use Orkney - if that were not the case this wouldn't be a discussion about the altname, it would be a WP:COMMONNAME discussion about the article title. And that's the point - you're using COMMONNAME arguments. But that's not relevant to altname. No one's saying that Orkney isn't predominant. The question is: is "Orkneys" still out there in the RS as an alternative name? And iI've given 6 instances from the RS showing quite clearly that it is. DeCausa (talk) 16:55, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I am struggling to understand what the real difference between these two examples is. King of England is deprectated/wrong although some RS's continue to use it. Orkneys is deprecated but the same applies. I've added a note to the etymology section per the UK article. Ben MacDui 18:50, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

text: I agree, it's minor point but it should be correct (Orkney) and not use the slang name. ULoXer (talk) 07:11, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orkneys (again)