Talk:Irish Scottish people

message: Irish Scots, Jewish Scots and Italian Scots have been well covered, I believe it's time for articles regarding Polish and Lithuanian settlement in Scotland. It's not hard to find articles on the internet about both communities, the BBC have an excellent article on Lithuanian settlement in Lanarkshire in their Legacies site. The Polish also have sizeable communities in Scotland most notably in St. Andrews and other costal towns.
Hopefully this could lead to further articles and ideally Highland/Irish/Italian/Polish/Lithuanian/Jewish migrants in Glasgow, I believe there is great potential in this subject.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elitejcx (talk • contribs) 22:55, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Articles for Lithuanian Scots and Polish Scots

message: One "Brandubh Blacmath" (one of the many proven sock-puppets of POV merchant/Wikitroll User:Rms125a@hotmail.com - see Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Rms125a@hotmail.com) has been adding his usual brand of highly-POV "fifth columnist" bullshit to this article. This may take some time, but let's look at this addition for a start:
:"Many Scottish-born Irish Catholics have been demanding the right to vote in Irish elections (while maintaining the franchise in Scottish and British elections, of course). A step in this direction has already been taken by the nomination of Ray O'Hanlon, a fervent believer in multiple franchises, to the Irish Seanad."
Citation please? I've lived in Scotland all my life and I've never heard of a single Scottish-born Irish Catholic demanding the right to vote in Irish elections. Try "Ray O'Hanlon" Seanad multiple franchise and see what you get about Scottish people voting in Irish Elections - not a word.
Robert, put up or shut-up. And stop your pathetic pretence at being "Oirish Catholic" Brandath Blacdubh - your recent post at Talk:Celtic F.C. shows you caught red-handed. Camillus (talk) 23:36, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Unreference additions

message: In the UK census of 2001, the new category "Irish" was added to the list of ethnic 
 background, by Tony Blair's Labour government, against the wishes of the vast majority
 of the British population'''''
Citation required for this bold statement?
 ...Irish immigrants, who refused to integrate with the wider community.
No citation again.
My Encyclopedia Britannica states how, despite misgivings of disharmony regarding the influx of the Irish, this proved unfounded, and Scotland is a country "remarkably free of religious and racial strife". That's one of the reasons I love to live here. Do we need Americans, with their fantasy-land imagery of Ireland and Scotland stirring up strife, whether dropping their dollars into NORAID coffers, or gun-running for the UDA? Decidely not.
 these teams faced discrimination from the football authorities, and there was  controversy  
 over whether their players should be picked to play in international games,
 especially against the Irish international team, given the political developments  over  
 the early 20th century, culminating in the Anglo-Irish War.'''''
Shows Rms's usual ignorance of Scottish history. The controversy referred to applied to a brief period in the 1890s. Players of the cited teams were a feature of the Scottish national team well before Civil War in Ireland.
Rms attempts to add the garbage again about "Scot" being an Irish word for "thief" or "raider". "Gael" is a Welsh word for "raider". The Vikings were raiders. The addition of "thief" without any justification is just plain POV.
 the Irish were barbaric slave traders
All civilizations at this time used slaves. Every heard of the Roman empire? It's also a bit ironic to have an American calling the Irish of 1500 years "brutal slave traders", when the US only out-lawed slavery, after a vicious civil war, 140 years ago.
Regarding Rms's additions to "prominent" Irish-Scots. When did criminals and terrorists become "prominent"? Should we list John Wilkes Booth/Charles Manson/Jeffrey Dahmer in the list of prominent Americans?
Who the hell is Mick Derrig? (Apart from being one of Rms's sock puppets User:MickDerrig) Gary Og? (See the AfD on this utterly non-notable pub/social club performer). Eire Og -  now has a "prod" tag (how ironic!)
As usual, Rms (or "BB" - pathetic) adds every Scot who is alleged to be a catholic to the list of Irish people in the UK. Viz Chris Burke. Not all catholics in Scotland are of Irish extraction.
I have no problem with some of the MPs = but why the derogatory "Blairite"? Blair is the leader of the party which has won three UK elections. So some Labour MPs support their leader? So what!
And then there's the laughable re-addition of Sean Connnery - who Baldrick Blackbird added himself, when he has never been classed as an Irish-Scot - ever heard of a straw man?
Rms/BB, when are you going to face the fact that the Scottish National Party's anthem is Burns's Scots Wha Hae, and all Scots sing Flower of Scotland, rather than your "Caledonia" pop-song? Are all the scots so stupid that they call themselves "thieves" and "raiders", and need an old American to point out their idiocy? Camillus (talk) 16:25, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As usual, Robert/Baldrick can't answer the points so just reverts to attacking other editors. What the f*ck has Ramelton got to do with anything, Robert? Camillus (talk) 10:42, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: More unrefenced additions

message: "others however shun any association with their country of residence and celebrate their Irishness."
I can see why this was deleted but I disagree with (what I presume is) the reasoning. The term "Irish-Scots" suggests-to me anyway-those of dual nationality, i.e. Who class themselves as both Scottish and Irish. However, many persons of Irish descent living in Scotland have no afinity or identfication with it and see themselves as Irish living abroad. Deleting that sentence would appear to deny that reality.
:Yes, this is a sensitive subject, and I would prefer if User:Arniep had discussed his removal first. The article describes Irish-Scots as being, mainly, the descendents of Irish people who migrated to Scotland in the 19th and 20th century (though, of course, there has "always" been Irish people on Scotland). I do know the type that becomes "more Irish than the Irish" (you get them in the States as well), but I (at least personally) don't know many people who "shun any association with their country of residence". Maybe I don't go to enough Wolfe-Tones gigs? Camillus (talk) 01:15, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps! ;) By "association" perhaps I should have said "identify with" or such like.
The whole nationality/ethnicity thing is a hard one-on the one hand you have people of Asian heritage who want to be Scottish/Brittish but are constantly told that they are, well, not. Contrast with someone of Irish descent who is constantly told they are "wrong" if they assert that they are Irish. (Lost my chain of thought-it's half two in the morning!!) D'you get what I mean?? Or should I go to bed and rephrase? :P
Perhaps: "...others however have only the minimal identification with their country of residence and choose instead to celebrate their Irish heritage..."?GiollaUidir 01:28, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Irish-Scots vs Irish

message: I misunderstood. Having said that, I think others might take the quote as being encyclopediac information too. Perhaps the text leading up to the quote should be ammended, and double quotes should surround the quote (maybe it should be italicised too)..? --Mal 21:11, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks fine with those big quotes around it Angus! I'll have to remember that wee bit of code. Cheers. --Mal 02:39, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Important note (1066 and all that) 

message: As with any national "label", the term "Irish-Scots" is open to interpretation; many Scottish-born descendants of the Irish immigrants would style themselves "Scottish", while others take pride in their dual nationality. The same is true of any other groups, such as Irish-Americans or Italian-Americans, where the link to the country of origin may be decades, or even centuries old. However, loyal Scots naturally resent this perceived disloyalty and refusal to assimilate. Moreover, Scotland is not the United States (even compared to the 26 Counties), and it is not the "melting pot" that the Labour Party and the fifth columnists in Scotland seek to hide behind. As Mick Derrig, a prominent Irish-Scot puts it:
 ... [b]ecause Catholics still predominate in the lower socio-economic orders and it is an unwritten subtext that Catholics in Scotland, because so many of them have maintained an emotional attachment to Ireland, are not really full members of Scottish society. For many in the West of Scotland, that is an accurate picture of their mindset. It is certainly the sense of identity I grew up with. We were expatriate Irish. That identity would not be a problem in New York; in Glasgow it can be a stabbing offence.
The fact that those who rubbish the notion of "fifth columnists" in Scotland insist on referring to themselves as "hyphenated" Scots simply reinforces the sectarianism in the "West of Scotland".
Brandubh Blathmac 08:33, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Labels

message: Ali-oops: there is no untruth here. There is me and the wannabe censor Demiurge (Ante Pavelic, domestic terrorism in the US, The McNamara Brothers, Irish-Scots, Eamon de Valera's refugee policy, etc., etc., etc.). 
For how much longer is Demiurge going to be free to gut or censor anything he feels like without having to provide a reason, other than mindless boilerplate, which even he should realise is not going to fly. I'm not going to be censored, especially when I am right, and I have the facts, the evidence, and yes, even the sources. 
The 20th century is gone and the Irish censor with it. This is the 21st.
Brandubh Blathmac 09:47, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: POV

message: I deleted negative reference to Tony Blair's Labour Party, and to meaning of word "Scot" as raider or thief, given general, almost universal ignorance of the real meaning of the word, despite relentless use of it and its conjugations.
Brandubh Blathmac 10:18, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Edits

message: Hollywood-esque/unbalanced POV by notorious wiki-censor Demiurge rv on 10 April 2006
:As with any national "label", the term "Irish-Scots" is open to interpretation; many Scottish-born descendants of the Irish immigrants would style themselves "Scottish", while others take pride in their dual nationality. The same is true of any other groups, such as Irish-Americans or Italian-Americans, where the link to the country of origin may be decades, or even centuries old.
Note the obsession with hyphenated identities (a la Camillus McElhinney) as though Britain or Scotland were the US.
However, loyal Scots naturally resent this perceived disloyalty and refusal to assimilate. Moreover, Scotland is not the United States and it is not the "melting pot" that the Labour Party and the perceived fifth columnists in Scotland seek to hide behind. As Mick Derrig, a prominent Irish-Scot puts it:
Time to speak up for the underdog.
:...[b]ecause Catholics still predominate in the lower socio-economic orders and it is an unwritten subtext that Catholics in Scotland, because so many of them have maintained an emotional attachment to Ireland, are not really full members of Scottish society. For many in the West of Scotland, that is an accurate picture of their mindset. It is certainly the sense of identity I grew up with. We were expatriate Irish. That identity would not be a problem in New York; in Glasgow it can be a stabbing offence (see 1).
The voice of the Irish passport-carrying, Celtic man in Scotland (Caledonia??) himself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.194.2.108 (talk • contribs) 
* Hi again, Robert. This IP address didn't last long this time. Time to get another? - Ali-oops✍ 06:19, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ali - I've had a message left on my talk page by an editor with an IP address only. Is this that same person do you think? --Mal 02:22, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: * Yes, it's Robert again - Ali-oops✍ 06:16, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Robert: you're just boring now. I suggest you get yourself a life, or at least make your nonsensical alterations of articles based in fact that you've merely twisted a little bit rather than just posting complete fabrications.GiollaUidir 19:55, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Redux

message: I checked the source provided in the edit summary by User:78.149.165.9 and, after welcoming him or her to Wikipedia, informed him/her I could not confirm the assertions based on his/her source (a statistical spreadsheet). I came up with the following from that source:
* KS06, which gives "White Irish" total as 49,428 (0.98%) -- there was no listing for "Irish-Scots" or any other subgroup matching the category in question
* KS07, which indicates that 15.88% of the population declared themselves Catholic -- but that does not dispositively equal assertions that at least 1,000,000 people in Scotland are of Irish ancestry or consider themselves accordingly as there are Catholics in Scotland (admittedly a minority) who are not of Irish descent.
Just to add that I know that I have a history on this article, which brought out the worst in me some five (5) years ago, but now I simply want to be sure that the assertions made by User:78.149.165.9 are accurate. I did my due diligence by checking the source he/she cited and could not confirm his/her findings. I will not contest the findings if valid links can be found proving this. I let User:78.149.165.9 know that if he/she can provide better sourcing for the assertions made the edits will not be contested. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 01:21, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent rv of edits

message: This article is quite ridiculous to be honest. Scotland is not some new nation like America or Australia. For goodness sake Scotland is far older than even Ireland itself. The ridiculous notion of ancestry really shouldn't be being entertained here especially in this day and age. We know all people in Scotland and indeed the rest of Europe and many other continents could trace their ancestry to other CONTINENTS never mind many, many countries over the generations as we know for a fact that at one point in the not so distant past there weren't any humans in Scotland or the rest of Europe and many other continents. 
For example, every single person (or near enough) on the island of Ireland could trace their genealogy back to Scotland. Considering it was tribes from Scotland who first began settling the island (crossing what was probably a land bridge or at least a very shallow body of water around 2,000 years after Scotland had begun to be settled. So really that would mean all "Irish-Scottish" people were originally Scottish in the first place by the nonsense of ancestry.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.104.205.249 (talk) 20:30, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ridiculous 

message: "This figure is not believed to be accurate as it would mean that the number of Irish descent is practically the same number as that of people born in Ireland." Wether its thousands or 1.5 million its not accurate. The Republics population is over 4.5 million, the whole island is over 6.5 million, Scotland's population is about 5.5 million. Scotland would have to be mostly of Irish decent to be "practically the same number as that of people born in Ireland." Im taking that bit out because its clearly nonsense!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.126.25.46 (talk) 22:30, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some statistics are totally wrong 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Irish-Scots. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090527021436/http://www.scrol.gov.uk/scrol/warehouse/NewWards_ER_CA.jsp to http://www.scrol.gov.uk/scrol/warehouse/NewWards_ER_CA.jsp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150916201247/http://hiberniansaintpatricks.co.uk/history/ to http://hiberniansaintpatricks.co.uk/history/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:03, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Not sure how I view this page move and the subsequent one but it should have been discussed. Mutt Lunker (talk) 12:03, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page move 

message: Please stop warring, revert yourself and discuss until a consensus has been reached, per WP:BRD. Mutt Lunker (talk) 13:07, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: per WP:HATDAB:  Olchug (talk) 13:12, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Is the primary topic from a worldwide view identical to your viewpoint? If so, can you prove that with non-American sources? The Banner talk 16:09, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Warring 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: not moved. Clear consensus to keep current title. (closed by non-admin page mover)  ~StyyxTalk? 16:20, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Irish Scottish people →  – more WP:PRECISE. Irish-Scots may also refer to Ulster Scots people. Other options: Scottish people of Irish descent, Scots of Irish descent. Olchug (talk) 10:56, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

text: Oppose Another option is to look at it with a non-American viewpoint and do nothing. Just because "Irish Scottish people" is an ethnic group while "Scots with Irish ancestry" is much wider. This starts to look like POV-pushing. The Banner talk 17:52, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: @The Banner I have nothing to do with America, and have never been there. What are you speaking about? Olchug (talk) 17:55, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

text: @The Banner can you prove with sources that such  exists separately? The main category is named :Category:Scottish people of Irish descent, by the way. Olchug (talk) 17:58, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you prove with sources that the group does not exist and can be wiped off this world? The Banner talk 19:39, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

text: Strong oppose per The Banner. Super Ψ Dro 19:54, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

text: Strong oppose in accordance with The Banner. Actioning this request would result in an inconsistent approach with other groups of shared ethnicity. Does the proposer intend to take the same approach with categories such as Anglo-Scots, Anglo-Irish people & Anglo-Indian, to name just a few? There's nothing confusing about the current title. Leave it as it is. Stroness (talk) 10:57, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

text: Oppose per the Banner's arguments. Dunutubble (talk) (Contributions) 15:53, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 18 March 2022