Talk:Tawse

message: I noticed this article does not have a photo so I asked my friend if I could photograph his fine specimen of a tawse and added it to the Commons as public domain. Kit 07:14, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo Added 

message: Please remember, when editing the article, that it needs to be encyclopedic in tone, neutral in point of view, and sourced and verifiable where possible. Salivating description of 'terrifying thrashings' might be fine on a S&M website, but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia.
: I repeat this comment. Just because material is on another website, doesn't mean it should be here. The Land 09:11, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  WP:NPOV 

message: This article has been selectively edited by someone who is attempting to change history.
As the author, I own the copyright, and have supplied my original article in good faith.
As a descendant of Mr Philp, I have the family papers and I believe I am well placed to be able to supply some facts here, to augment a very selective and misleading text.
Deleting factual material reflects extremely badly on the whole of Wikipedia which should be an open source resource, not propaganda!  
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.219.117.5 (talk) 18:15, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: If this is the case, it is very important that you establish that you do in fact have copyright and that you are granting permission for its use. Familiarise yourself on how to do this here. Please do not re-post the material until this has been established as it will henceforth be regarded as vandalism. It should be obvious that Wikipedia must take potential copyright violations very seriously as it could face legal action unless it has been established that permission has been granted for use. Mutt Lunker (talk) 19:00, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism of this Article

message: The tawse is a form of corporal punishment, which may be regarded by some as child abuse but is not by others. To unequivocally categorise it as such would be to promote one point of view over another (see WP:NPOV), though putting this in a "see also" section would not. Mutt Lunker (talk) 17:46, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I think putting "child abuse" in "see also" is also highly POV. -- Alarics (talk) 18:08, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: On reflection, an ill-considered attempt at a compromise: it should indeed not even be in "see also". Mutt Lunker (talk) 19:27, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Child abuse 

message: It's very confusing to see an article about British schools with content like the following: "Scottish public (state) schools…". State schools are definitely not public schools in Scotland or the rest of the U.K. (if it is felt necessary to explain what sort of school a U.K. state school is, why not link straight to the article on the subject?), so I'm not certain that the "clarification" actually adds anything. It seems cumbersome to separate out the schools anyway, because it offers no information on state schools which didn't use the strap; perhapsit could be rendered along the lines of: "The tawse was used in both the state and public school systems, although some chose other methods of punishment." Jock123 (talk) 23:05, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: There is ambiguity about what "public" means in relation to Scottish schools, so I've fixed it by deleting "public". -- Alarics (talk) 23:30, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: In Scotland schools which are private are referred to as private schools and never as public schools, as they are, confusingly, in England; public schools are state schools. No ambiguity. Public school is a perfectly accurate term here, even more so in what is effectively a historical article. Per WP:ENGVAR I'll revert, linking the term but leaving in the clarification in parenthesis for those from parts of the world where public schools aren't public in the conventional sense. Mutt Lunker (talk) 23:55, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you certain about that? I'm I have come across schools like Fettes being described as public schools. In any case, what matters is what the readers understand, especially since this article isn't exclusively about Scotland. -- Alarics (talk) 13:12, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess there will be examples whereby for instance Tony Blair might be referred to as a public schoolboy by the national/English press because of his attendance at Fettes or possibly even by extension Fettes being referred to as a public school but this wouldn't be regarded as (or indeed be) correct usage in Scotland. See the lede at the Fettes article. The term may have lost some level of currency in the last century I guess but the term "public school" is carved into the stone of countless school buildings in Scotland, none of which are private/independent. It matters that the readers understand and that they, in an encyclopedia after all, are informed and removing the correct term in one variety of English and an opportunity to enlighten people about it, because the usage of the term implies something different in some, only, other varieties of English is a lost opportunity and goes against WP:ENGVAR. As framed at the moment the correct term is used with the aversion of confusion. The article may not be absolutely, exclusively about Scotland but has very strong ties.  Mutt Lunker (talk) 15:36, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Whatever, it was not I who was complaining about the present wording. I simply changed it to meet the concerns of Jock123. -- Alarics (talk) 18:34, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, no worries. I'm actually not entirely clear as to some of Jock's points but at the least they seem a bit confused, if not downright wrong. I think he is incorrectly applying the English usage of the term "public school" in a Scottish context. Mutt Lunker (talk) 19:43, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I thought it was pretty clear: Scotland has *State* schools, which are not ever called "Public"; there *may* have been a time in the past when it was different (the school near where I lived in Glasgow has “Parochial” carved into the front, but I wouldn’t want to have that accepted as a general term), but not in my life-time. Otherwise, public/ private is use exactly as it is in England, to refer to non-State run schools. Anybody who said they went to a public school would be taken to have had a private education… See this General Teaching Council article here for “State school”, used for state-controlled education, for example. Here’s another from the Scottish Government Education Scotland web-site.Jock123 (talk) 20:54, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

text: Removing it doesn’t impoverish it, it makes it clearer and more factual; the term “public school” for “state school” was not in use for all the time I was in State eduction in Scotland, a period during which thetawse *was* in use - how does using antique term, not in use then and not in use now improve anything? It would be like saying that chemists used to be called apothecaries, so that to call them anything but that would be impoverishing… Jock123 (talk) 13:09, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Excluding a factually and historically correct term to make something more factual is an illogical notion, particularly when it is qualified in the context ("Scottish (public) state schools") for those potentially-confused (by the rather confusing English usage; in world terms a distinct minority). That the usage of the term may initially challenge and surprise some is surely not something we should be ducking in a work of reference, what’s more an active reason to preserve its inclusion. We are covering the appropriate period of history, not individual user’s lifetimes and to use your not very comparable example, would you remove the term "apothecary" from discussing a historical matter and replace it with "dispensing chemist", just in case a reader was confused? If you really think the term “public” is misapplied, best to take further discussion to the talk page of the State Schools article regarding the Scotland section. Mutt Lunker (talk) 14:43, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

text: "the latter [private] is just not really used in England, where "public" or "independent" would be the terms" -- I don't know where you got that idea from. "Private school" is probably as commonly used as "independent school" in England. "Public school" on the other hand refers to a much smaller number of famous elite schools that form only a small proportion of all independent schools. -- Alarics (talk) 07:34, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: "Private schools generally prefer to be called independent schools, because of their freedom to operate outside of government and local government control." but the situation in Scotland is described so: "Independent schools in Scotland educate about 31,000 children and often referred to as Private Schools.". (If you disagree, better to take up the matter on their talk pages rather than here.) BTW I wasn't equating the English usage of the term "public schools" with all independent schools in England, just referring to those terms which are used there and to the terms used in Scotland. Mutt Lunker (talk) 11:16, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  State/ public/ private/ independent schools…