Talk:Scottish country dance

message: At the foot of the page is [ [ Category : List of Scottish country dances]] - which in turn leads to List of Scottish country dances. Or maybe it is the other way round. In any event, it needs a cleanup please. I am unsure how to fix it. 14:35, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Be bold. Go through and see if you can word things differently. Add words, change words, delete unnecessary words. Add anything you know about it, and worry about fixing the formatting and stuff up later. Oh, and generally, you put the  tag on your user talk page. GofG |||  Contribs 14:51, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean up please 

message: The final parargraph of the 'Steps and Technique' section has me a little puzzled.  
"SCD is very much a team effort, and attempts at self-glorification through
unconsidered "embellishments" are often frowned upon by others. The general feeling is that "extras" are fine when the time and place are right, but should be left out when less  experienced dancers in the set might be confused, or during classes."
Firstly it simply raised two questions:  What, in the author's opinion is the right time and place for 'embelishments'? I agree wholeheartedly that they should not be done in sets where they will cause disruption, I would equally argue that less experienced dancers should be warned of the local common ones and have it explained to them that they should and can (if the dancer carrying out said embellishments can actually do them) continue with the unaltered figure/figures.  This leads into the second question; If these embellishments are not appropriate in class then where are dancers supposed to learn both them and the accompanying footwork?  The learning and teaching of the locally common practices would certainly help to eliminate the problem of these embelishments causing confusion to a newer/ less experienced dancer.  If they have met them and had them explained in the 'safe' environment of a class then the experience of them or others at a social dance will be far less distracting.  
I have often come accross the advice that if one wants to add embelishments: First check the set can 'cope', if so as dancing couple dance the first repetition as written as technically accurately (including footwork) as you can (mainly to prove to those of the authors persuasion that you CAN) then the second with whatever alterations you wish (maintaining the footwork etc) - if these will impact on or require other couple's participation it is clearly necessary to agree this in advance.  However the vast majority of alterations that I am aware of, if danced 'correctly', do not require others to change their dancing, they certainly make the dancing look different which can be confusing for less experienced dancers which is why judgement must be used in choosing to dance them but that is not the same thing.
The second point is that I would say that the reason I and most people I know add 'embelishments'  is not for 'self glorification' as has so politely been suggested but for enjoyment.  It appears, in my experience, to be more common among the relatively speaking younger dancers.  I would suggest that those who disapprove should consider whether this is a factor in the reluctance of young people to be involved in dancing.  Especially given one is seldom left in any doubt as to a person's opinion should you add them in a set or in the presence of someone who disapproves.  Interestingly it is also my experience that those who disapprove most strongly are NOT those who are confused by others dancing these variations, in fact they are usually more than capable of informing you precisely what was not correct and of coping with them.  Those who cannot cope while sometimes, depending on personality, being upset or bothered by their confusion when they thought they knew a dance, are usually more concerned by their lack of knowledge and the inconsiderate nature of the addition.  They are often very appreciative of the added enjoyment and often request to be taught the alteration.  Clearly adding without consideration of others is not something that should be encouraged and if this is the case then all involved may be upset.   
I hope someone can enlighten me on these issues, Puzzled.
134.36.7.164 14:38, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Embelishments' 

message: I removed the claim that 
SCD is 'more popular than it ever was when it was only done in Scotland' as this seems questionable given the popularity of Scottish dances in the 19th century and the presumed regularity of dancing in Scotland at any time - as far as I know no estimate exists of the active community of Scottish dancers worldwide, if it does then I retract my edit! Rmcubed 01:38, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would estimate about one in five where I am but my estimates really have no place in Wiipedia! I believe there is some controversy going on in countries like Australia because the cost gets multiplied somehow, I haven't looked into it, which would tend to reduce numbers. Dmcq (talk) 08:48, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of unsubstantiated claim 

message: I have added a neutral point of  view notice to the history section of this article. I don't think this applies to the whole section, but there are many parts where the tone of the prose drifts. With very little direct online references provided, it is difficult for a reader to verify the contents. - Soothrhins (talk) 07:46, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutral point of view of History section