Talk:List of burghs in Scotland

message: The term 'burgh' is still commonly known, but it is generally only used in legal and historical documentation. In everyday speech it is certainly not commonly used as an alternative to 'town'. Adambisset 01:57, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]

message: Burgh (date of adoption of police system) 		
Earlier burghal history
Arbroath royal burgh (1836)                		Royal burgh 1599.
Brechin royal burgh (1893?)                		Royal burgh status ratified 1641.
Forfar royal burgh (1857)                  		Created royal burgh c 1123 - 62
Montrose royal burgh (1833)                		Created royal burgh by c 1124 - 53
Broughty Ferry burgh (1864 - 1913) ‡		None
Carnoustie burgh (1889)                    		None
Kirriemuir burgh (1834)                    		Burgh of barony 1459, burgh of regality 1670
Monifieth burgh (1895)                     		None
‡ Absorbed by Dundee royal burgh 1913
Lozleader 11:10, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Angus]] or [[Angus | Forfarshire]]

message: I take it the county names and boudaries used in the article are those used for local government purposes circa 1890 to 1975, not earlier names and boundaries. I intend to add a note to this effect in the article. Laurel Bush 10:51, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, that was the way I built the table. Lozleader 17:08, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  County names and boundaries 

message: ===Inverbervie ===
I am finding no reference to Inverbervie, Aberdeenshire. According to District of burghs (UK Parliament) it was a parliamentary burgh 1708 to 1950. Laurel Bush 13:28, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: According to this  the police burgh originally had the three names - must have changed after 1918. Lozleader 17:07, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

text: errr I just looked at the district of burghs and am now thoroughly confused - perhaps the royal burgh (Queensferry) and burgh of regality (South Queensferry) had different areas with an overlap?
Lozleader 23:04, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  VOB link may be some help. Lozleader 23:13, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Just looking at the table in District of burghs, I wonder if the original table from which the data is extracted might not have read  the "Buckhaven, Methil & Innerleven", and "Queensferry / South Queensferry" but with each entry split onto two different lines - later misinterpreted as different burghs? Just a theory. BTW the work you have done on thse is valuable - and picked up a good few mistakes! Well done. Lozleader 22:53, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Parliamentary burghs 

message: I am finding no reference to Inverbervie, Aberdeenshire. According to District of burghs (UK Parliament) it was a parliamentary burgh 1708 to 1950. Laurel Bush 13:28, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Inverbervie 

message: Under Fife I find a reference to a police burgh called Buckhaven and Methil, created 1891. In District of burghs I find references to two parliamentary burghs called Buckhaven and Methil and Innerleven, created 1918. Perhaps by 1918 there was no sense of a need for the names of parliamentary burghs to correspond with the names of burghs for other purposes. Or is there some other explanation? Laurel Bush 12:07, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: According to this  the police burgh originally had the three names - must have changed after 1918. Lozleader 17:07, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Buckhaven, Methil and Innerleven 

message: I am finding no reference to South Queensferry. According to District of burghs it was a parliamentary burgh 1708 to 1832. District of burghs, however, has the burgh in Fife. I guess it was Midlothian. Laurel Bush 12:29, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: errr I just looked at the district of burghs and am now thoroughly confused - perhaps the royal burgh (Queensferry) and burgh of regality (South Queensferry) had different areas with an overlap?
Lozleader 23:04, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  VOB link may be some help. Lozleader 23:13, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Queensferry/South Queensferry 

message: OK. Think I have now accounted for all of the parliamentary burghs in List of burghs in Scotland, except Wigtown seems to be missing. It was one of the Wigtown Burghs. Laurel Bush 12:51, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just looking at the table in District of burghs, I wonder if the original table from which the data is extracted might not have read  the "Buckhaven, Methil & Innerleven", and "Queensferry / South Queensferry" but with each entry split onto two different lines - later misinterpreted as different burghs? Just a theory. BTW the work you have done on thse is valuable - and picked up a good few mistakes! Well done. Lozleader 22:53, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Wigtown 

message: I've stumbled upon this document - http://www.caledonia.org.uk/commonweal/docs/commongood_v3.pdf - which lists all Scottish burghs. It is based on George S. Pryde's book, The Burghs of Scotland, but with the addition of police burghs. 
Might be of use... From a quick glace there a few more listed... /wangi 22:02, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Very interesting. I wonder how easy it is to obtain a copy of Pryde's book. I can see this leading to complete redesign of the page.
Lozleader 11:22, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A useful source document 

message: From the Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland website:
I am not seeing Canongate listed in the article. Seems to have merged into Edinburgh mid 19th century. Laurel Bush 15:48, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Canongate 

message: Musselburgh is listed under Midlothian, even although it is situated in East Lothian, is this correct? Im.sarcastic 14:04, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Historically Midlothian (or Edinburghshire) included Musselburgh (see ). /wangi 14:21, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Musselburgh 

message: Rather than keep these lists separate, why not merge them into the tables here? It would only require an additional column, called "Post 1930 status" or something, and the background text could be put into Burgh, which needs expanding anyway. Any comments? Jonathan Oldenbuck 15:07, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Large burgh]] and [[Small burgh]] 

message: If the term has been legally abolished and is in disuse, why the hell is it being used here?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.194.146.58 (talk) 13:25, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Because they existed.  Similarly, we have articles on Municipal boroughs, Urban districts and Rural districts in England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, even though they were also abolished in the 1970s (later in the Republic of Ireland).  Incidentally, many towns in Scotland still describe themselves as "Royal borough".  Your argument seems to be on the basis that "the Austro-Hungarian Empire no longer exists, so we should not have an article about it."  Skinsmoke (talk) 11:19, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Towns or Burghs?