Talk:Scotland

Previous discussions from this Talk page are archived here:

• Archive 1
• Archive 2
• Archive 3
• Archive 4
• Archive 5
• Archive 6
• Archive 7
• Archive 8
• Archive 9

Wikinorthernireland's additions

Seem to be getting beat with the rv vandalism stick, but they are sourced and probably do make sense in the article - but not in the the introduction:

Despite the generally positive image of Scotland presented throughout the world, Scotland does have considerable social and crime problems. It has the second highest murder rate in Western Europe and people living in Scotland are more than three times as likely to be killed than those in England and Wales [1]. Rising levels of violence in Scotland have been aggravated by alcohol and drug abuse, gang culture and sectarian tensions. Although Catholic-Protestant tensions are reported most frequently in the case of Northern Ireland, sectarianism is particuarly rife in the West of Scotland. The city of Glasgow is especially dangerous and has been dubbed the "murder capital of Europe", with about 70 murders a year. Almost half of all murders in Scotland are committed by people under the influence of drugs or drink [2].

Scotland also has the lowest life expectancy of any region of the United Kingdom with men expected to live to 69.3 years [3]

So where? /wangi 17:27, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

No worries, must be somewhere else info can go. Def should be included somewhere

Added crime/social problems under a separate heading further in the article. You are right, better off not in the intro! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikinorthernireland (talk • contribs)

I've moved the text in question into the Demographics section. Not sure if this is suitable, but better than having it in the Geography section! - calum 19:28, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

It is not relevant for the main Scotland article. The inclusion of such text suggests Scotland is a lawless and dangeous land that is not the case. I've remove POV statements about sectarianism being rife in the West and Glasgow being especially dangerous. There is no proof for these statements. Astrotrain 19:36, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Cheers for removing the POV statements. User:Wikinorthernireland also added the same text (and removed a couple of paragraphs) on the Glasgow article (which I've reverted). - calum 19:50, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Well guys, have a read of http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4527570.stm - Glasgow is "The local authority area with the highest annual homicide rate was Glasgow with 55 victims per million population, more than double the national rate" and http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4031405.stm - "Statistics released in November last year showed that Glasgow had one of the highest murder rates in Western Europe at 58.7 per million of population - higher than in Belfast and double that of London". Also http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0,2763,1578388,00.html & http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2090-1796899,00.html - "Scotland has the second highest murder rate in western Europe and Scots are more than three times more likely to be murdered than people in England and Wales, according to a study by the World Health Organisation"... /wangi 20:00, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

But, is it really suitable having these statements prominently displayed on the Scotland article? I see no other countries with such negative statements (apart from the likes of countries with a record of human rights abuses, which are often listed in a "Politics" section). Shouldn't the text be on an article like (for example) Demographics of Scotland? - calum 20:08, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Our job is not to paint a nice picture, it's to write an encyclopedia. There are many references to back up this claim - it's not POV. Perhaps the Glasgow article is more appropriate for some of it, but lets not simply try to bury it because the image it gives isn't nice... /wangi 20:12, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not suggesting we remove it completely - I'm usually the first to tell visitors that Scotland may have a great reputation abroad, but it has serious social problems in its cities - I'm just not happy with what is, in my opinion, quite poorly referenced (online news reports rather than actual government statistics) and unusually placed information - as I said before, which other countries have text giving crime statistics on their main country article? - calum 11:51, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Well the news reports are based on primary research done by WHO, which was published 25 September 2005, I cannot find the research, but that's probably because i've not searched hard enough! [4] //wangi 13:58, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I just think it should be included because its true. Scotland has an extremely high murder rate - fact. Wikipedia is not here to gloss over the negative parts of Scotland. Overall its a good place but i think a short paragragh on social problems is sensible — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikinorthernireland (talk • contribs)

• I think some POV needs to be removed from the statements - for example:

"Almost half of all murders in Scotland are committed by people under the influence of drugs or drink [5]."

I am afraid that is, by definition, pov if it doesn't reference against anything else. What is the percentage of murders committed in england, wales, USA or France committed while under the influence? Unless there is something there to juxtapose that makes the Scottish percentage out of the ordinary then the statement is simply a lot of FUD. The use of hyperbole and weasel words should also be watched, "Scotland has an extremely high murder rate - fact" - I am afraid in comparison to a lot of other countries in the world it doesn't at all. Selective use of statistics to insert material is not what wikipedia is about. Problems should be mentioned - problems should not be sensationalised, exaggerated or worded in a way which is not accurate. SFC9394 21:06, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough, but lets work with the supplied references and a new/keen editor. I still think it's shocking what User:Sceptre done to the original edits - reverting without comment, as if it were just vandalism - that's not on and it's an abuse of the tool he's using.

So, any alternative ways of presenting this infomration? Thanks/wangi 21:14, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Right ta for backing me up on this one Wangi. User SFC9394 u obv care about this more than i do - I mentioned that Scotland has the second highest murder rate in Western Europe (fact not POV or FUD or whatever you wanna call it). That is a valid comparison. No point comparing to murder rate in some random asian/african countries than the local countries in Europe. Anyhow guys change whatever you like, i'm not that bothered but i don't think it was POV!! if anyone wants to find a comparison for the drugs/drink fact feel free btw. Wikinorthernireland 22:08, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Does anyone want to keep this information? I have trimmed out the POV statements and toned down the sectaranism rant- as very few murders and acts of violence take place in Scotland due to sectaranism. And there is no evidence that Glasgow is a "dangerous city". Indeed media reports during the week showed that Princes Street in Edinburgh has the highest numbers of crimes committed in Scotland. Astrotrain 21:47, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

yes the info should be kept mate! it's trimmed down fine btw, i couldn't be bothered arguing over it to be honest. That interesting about Edinburgh - maybe we'll have to get sorted on that page too (?!). Funny i had heard from people that Edinburgh is getting on the rough side too. Maybe i should stay away from Scottish articles as the Tartan wikipedians here seem to not like anything negative being said about the place. Didn't expect such a furious reponse to a paragraph on the crime in Scotland! Only kidding guys - it's nice you guys care about your country and what other people say about it! But nope i think it's best i still make contributions where i feel necessary and not feel censored. All the best guys. :-)Wikinorthernireland 22:08, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

I think that the info is definitely worth keeping. The problem is just that other country articles don't currently have this information. So adding it to this article puts an emphasis on it over and above its inherent significance. I suppose that the "right" thing to do would be to add this type of information as part of a "Crime and Social problems" section to all country articles as part of the Countries Wikiproject.

Context is important too though. For a Western European country these statistics may look pretty bad but for an English-speaking country they may look better. -- Derek Ross | Talk 14:38, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

True i agree Scotlands crime rate is prob not as high compared to North America. However there is no denying Scotland has a shockingly high crime rate compared to the 3 other constituent parts of the UK (England, Northern Ireland ans Wales) and in comparison to other Western European countries. True alot of the crime may be focused/centred on Glasgow and to a lesser extent Edinburgh but i def think some reference must be made to it. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and i think encyclopedias must include some reference to a high levels of criminal activity. As i have said before Scotland is a great country but there are alot of areas in central Scotland with very high crime rates, poor diet, low educational standards and poor life expectancy (compared to other parts of UK) Wikinorthernireland 16:14, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't think there's much place for them in the main article. They should be removed to somewhere else, besides they only concentrate on some newspaper articles. Using actual official figures (which can be found if necessary) show something a bit different. I removed the bit about Scottish men having the lowest life expectancy at 69.3. According to GRO Scottish men have a life expectancy of 73.8 http://www.gro-scotland.gov.uk/files/0204le-t1.pdf. I know who I'd rather believe.Globaltraveller 20:51, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Just looking at some other country articles, and it is indeed true that none of them have such a section. Finland, for example came top in the WHO report, but strangely enough that isn't mentioned into the preamble to the article. New sources should be found that provide actual data, and there is a whole Demographics of Scotland article that could do with some expansion and a section on (considered) social problems would be welcome. Other than that I can only assume judging by this users' spamming of both the Glasgow and Edinburgh articles, these are nothing more than POV edits. Sorry. Globaltraveller 21:25, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps the reason Scotland has had such an increase in the crime rate is due to the magnitute of things that are now illegal in Scotland since the establishment of the Scottish Parliament- smoking in public, hunting, preventing a woman breastfeeding in public, etc Astrotrain 21:43, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

In respons to Globetravellers comment - i have not been spamming, not a very nice comment and maybe Finland should have a section on its horrendous crime rate. They aren't POV - how many times do i have to say!!! - no1 believes me!!! Good call Astrotrain on the parliament making everything illegal lol :-) Wikinorthernireland 22:19, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but I think they are. They've been removed. When other countries have such a section, then maybe they should be considered to go into the main article, until that time, I don't think so, it is not equitable. It is not about portraying Scotland in a good or bad light, but it is outwith the nature of this article and others. Globaltraveller 22:27, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Whatever you want Mr Globetraveller "They've been removed" - i dunno how u alone can decide what can be removed. You obv don't like anyone portraying scotland in a bad light - i see you're a scottish wikipedian - quelle surprise!!!!! All you guys love to gang up on ppl that say anything negative. Really i wasn't that bothered about my additions until every1 started being so strange on this talk page. Anyhow what about at least mentioning more stuff about crime in Glasgow section ----it def isn't out of place there. Glasgow has terrible crime problems - must be mentioned. And for the 100000th time what i have written is not POV......if it was you'd know thats for sureWikinorthernireland 22:43, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Thankyou Wikinorthernireland. Does anyone need any further confirmation that the above user is spamming? As I said before one analysis of Scotland's crime rate (by the WHO) is not a good addition to the article - there are many different analysses. When other data can be found then maybe it could be put somewhere. But when you are spamming, it is generally reverted. Also, I'd be interested to know why a Wikipedia ADMIN reverted your initial edits, but they were put back into the article? Globaltraveller 22:56, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Now, now, gentlemen. Enough name calling already. Let's stick to discussing the article rather than each other's personal hygiene. Be nice to each other. -- Derek Ross | Talk 23:04, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I agree with wikinorthernireland. i've re-added the work. I think it should be included and we should be nicer to each other on wikipedia esp. Globaltraveller!!!! Crime in scotland is pretty high and i think it is right and proper to be included - after all it is all sourced! Also you can't just say wikinorthernireland is 'spamming' just cos u don't like the content - face the truth, encyclopedias include the truth and hard facts whether we like them or not 143.117.143.33 07:52, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Also the user Globaltraveller should not be just a bully on this. it is wikipedia not Globaltraveller-pedia lol or Scotland-R-Us-pedia! 143.117.143.33 07:54, 13 June 2006 (UTC) The data on crime merits inclusion - simple as. After all it is only a few lines in an article that is overall is gleaming about scotland and positive positive positive. A consideration of some of the negatives in a country with the second highest murder rate in Europe is suitable. I think this one will run and run. 143.117.143.33 07:54, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Hello just to add some more support for Wikinorthernireland and 143.117.143.33 . Yet again there has been vandalism and somebody has removed the section on social problems. This is not on. At least discuss how to make the section better but it must be included> 143.117.143.41 09:20, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Good to know other people agree about the Scottish stuff - Can't believe this is still an issue!!! lol Wikinorthernireland 09:31, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

• It should be pointed out to 143.117.143.41 & Wikinorthernireland the wikipedia rules on Sockpuppetry adding comments as an anon IP to inflate support for your own views as a registered editor is judged to be very uncool. The above comments (actually added by two IP addys, not one as they are signed) originate from an addy that removed a comment mistakenly posted by Wikinorthernireland to my talk page a couple of days ago - that was what tipped me off to the sockpuppetry. Sorry, Wikinorthernireland, but please respect the rules of wikipedia, irrespective of your views on a content dispute. SFC9394 09:44, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I can assure you I have nowt to do with the wikinorthernireland user - completely independent. The fact that possibly some edits to wikipedia articles may have come from this IP addy is cos its a shared computer at a university campus therefore there are 100s of comps with the same address :-) Now no more accusations people and keep in clean ! 143.117.143.41 10:02, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

That fails to explain why an anon IP address who I have had no previous interaction with on any subject or editing on here would delete Wikinorthernireland's comment from my talk page. How would a random anon get to my talk page? Why would they delete the comment? How coincidental that the editing pattern of the anon IP is on the exact same subject and following the exact same line as Wikinorthernireland. Too many coincidences. SFC9394 10:13, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok get a life mate and stop trying to be poirot - ur not doing that good a job !! This actually is a hoot. i said at the start of this whole talk thing that i didn't care that much to be honest. I only cared more when ppl started been nasty on this! taje a chill pill. but no matter what Scotland does have 2nd highest mueder rate in W.Europe. You guys can try and conceal it as much as you like but i think its encyclopedia-worthy. Wikinorthernireland 10:21, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I await the next nasty comment soon btw - but please be nice otherwise you guys will actually have me in stiches - its not that impt really in the scheme of things its only an internet encyclopedia! Wikinorthernireland 10:22, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

A compromise might be an idea. Originally facts were posted about Scotlands murder rate in the intro and a compromise of a separate section in the article was accepted. How about working like adults and either producing a whole article on Scotlands problems or accept a few lines in the main article. Oh i'm independent of the wikinorthernireland btw before any more assumptions!!!! 143.117.143.41 10:28, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Please have a read of WP:Civility - don't go around telling other editors to "get a life". I will leave it to others on here to decide the merits of the content dispute, and your conduct (and potential use of socks) in that dispute; I only added my opinions on the subject. I held good faith on your edits up until you deleted my sock comment above (further browsing shows you have deleted some critical posts on your talk page made by other editors as well). I am here to help build a good, accurate and NPOV encyclopedia - I am attempting to conceal nothing - what I took issue with was the clearly POV wording which you were attempting to use to phrase content. SFC9394 10:37, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I've put the section in the Demographics of Scotland article, I don't think it should be on the main article, so have removed it from there. I'm not too happy with that section either, but it is a compromise I think, and an expanded social problems section on the Demographics of Scotland article is necessary. Given the behaviour of Wikinorthernireland and sockpuppets, I think a further revert of that nature is vandalism and the appropriate action should be taken. Globaltraveller 14:47, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Thats fine. I don't think i'll be bothering with anymore of this anyhow. Good luck to all Wikinorthernireland 15:54, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Changes to the national anthem

I went ahead and made my suggested edit, visible in the template, and tried my hand at writing the article linked in the box,Multiple unofficial anthems. I know it probably needs work, and if it's unacceptable then I apologise for overstepping my authority or allowance, but thought it was worth a go to see if it was a possible option.

-- Thanks.

Kaenei 07:13, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Article has been changed to National Anthem of Scotland and some nice Wikipedians have done some editing -- I think it looks really good, and better than "Nothing", in the infobox. :)

Kaenei 00:04, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I've just seen that the Infobox has been edited and "God Save the Queen (UK de-facto) has been removed with the justification in the history file "GSTQ is ont the Scottish national anthem," explaining it. I was just wondering if there's a point in trying to contribute to new ideas if the reasons aren't listed here, in a section debating such, so other people can contribute.

It's fairly obvious to most people GSTQ us not the national anthem of Scotland, which is why the edit I had made included the words afterwards. Whilst I'm new here, I don't really see the point of a discussion page if people make changes to other people's edits without debating or listing their points for discussion. Seems people might as well just change what they -think- is right? Of course that isn't a solution, but nobody seems to be taking me on.

Kaenei 08:28, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

"Scot" - etymology

"Etymology The word Scot was borrowed from Latin and its use, to refer to Scotland, dates from at least the first half of the 10th century, when it first appeared in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle as a reference to the Land of the Gaels, analogous to the Latin Scotia"

Despite that this paragraph is called 'Etymology' I don't find any here. It is explained that this word has been used to refer to Scotland. Yes, that I knew all the time, since I knew the word. I had expected to find an explanation here or somewhere else, from where the word comes from and what it means. Ok, it derives from Latin 'Scotia'. Now the problem has just been moved. Has the word just popped up in Latin, or did the Romans take it from somewhere else, or is it actually a latin word with a specific meaning? Considering how much has been written about Scotland I wonder the more that still nobody has paid attention to the origin of the name. Could somebody please elaborate on this? The only clue I have is a mythological one about Scota the egyptian wife of Mil and a speculation about connections to the Scythians. Both seem a little too far stretched to me. Truchses 09:32, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

From the OED:

The source of the late Latin word [of c. 400 AD] is obscure. There is no evidence that it represents the native name of any Gaelic-speaking people (the Irish Scot, an Irishman, pl. Scuit, appears to be a learned word from Latin), nor does it exist in Welsh, though Welshmen in writing Latin have from the earliest times used Scoti as the rendering of Gwyddel (Gaels). It may possibly be an adoption of a name bestowed at an early period by Britons or Gauls on a Gaelic people (cf. the Gaulish personal names Scottos, Scottios); Sir J. Rhys has suggested that it may have meant ‘tattooed’, cogn. w. Welsh ysgwthr a cutting, carving, or sculpturing; other conjectures have also been offered

Not sure that clarifies matters much, but it's a start. No-one actually knows, seems to be the gist. Shimgray | talk | 09:41, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Note also that there's no etymological connection to "scot" (a type of fee/payment or "scotch" (to put down, cancel, break). Shimgray | talk | 09:43, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Small problem, the motto "Nemo me impune laccesit" is not the motto of Scaotland, it is the motto of the Black Watch, a highly notable highland infantry regiment.

Subdivisions

"Although no longer used for the purposes of local government, the traditional counties of Scotland are still used as geographical areas; as are the regions and districts of Scotland."

There are articles on older subdivisions still in use in Scotland which a user has deleted with the comments- "rv- POV", but without any real explanation of why it is POV to link to these pages. Astrotrain 20:20, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

They aren't, are they ? Traditional I mean; that's not what the linked article is called. Anyway, if we are going to edit war over this, counties of Scotland and regions and districts of Scotland work fine without piping. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:25, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

That's fine by me. I don't really have an opinion on the traditional counties debate, but I thought the context appropiate in relation to the offical subdivisions currently in use. Astrotrain 20:25, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

There is no such thing as a "traditional county" in Scotland (and highly controversial in England or Wales too). This is entirely an invention of the dickhead vandals at the "Association of British Counties" (sic) and County Watch. Argyll existed many, many, many, many, many centuries before it became a "county" in 1889. Same for Orkney, Ayrshire, Moray, Midlothian, Fife, etc, etc, etc. --Mais oui! 20:31, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

There are still counties such as Lanarkshire etc, used for valuation, health board purposes etc. There are articles on these subdivisions, so they should be linked here. There are regions of Scotland, such as Strathclyde (used for police and fire services). This too should be linked here. Whether you want to describe them as traditional or not is not important. These articles exist and should be linked here. Astrotrain 20:56, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

The counties of Scotland article starts by saying that the counties have many and varied origins (hmm, doesn't say "kingdoms" among them, which it should) and have I have removed two instances of the ABC/CW favourite "traditional counties", the one that's left is qualified as so-called. Should be less objectionable now I hope. Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:07, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. It seems silly to delete valid links. I will add back tomorrow, or someone else can. Astrotrain 21:46, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I find it very interesting indeed to see "revert POV, per talk" in the article history by User:Mais oui! when removing the links again, when infact the consensus here is to have the links. /wangi 03:23, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Gaelic pronounciation

It is perhaps a bit harsh to totally remove this bit: "pronounced IPA: [ˈaɫapə], approximately "ALA-puh"". Can we put is as a footnote or something. I tried to do it but it looked silly. Is there a std Wikipedia method of putting footnotes?

(While I am here: this article, esp the history section, is still far too long. Can one of you history buffs please, please take some sensible secateurs to that section... please!!! We have absolutely tons of history articles for readers to (hopefully easily) find. We do not need everything at this main gateway article.) --Mais oui! 08:12, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Devolution referendum

When the article discusses the current devolution system, could it state that the it was endorsed in a Scottish referendum in 1997? It's interesting to point out that the Scottish people chose this system in preference to the then status quo, or outright independance. (New member, never edited a page before! Want to run this past you all first)

That's wrong. Independence was not and has never been put before the people of Scotland in any referendum. Small point, I know. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 18:32, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I think you could add something about devolution, but Calgacus is right. The independence question was not put on the referendum ballot papers. The choice given to the Scottish electorate was between the status quo and devolution. Viewfinder 18:35, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

What about this wording (i've checked, the Welsh devolution referendum was in the same year). You are correct on the independance question, by the way:

Constitutionally the United Kingdom is a unitary state with one sovereign parliament and government. Under a system of devolution (or home rule), adopted after Scottish and Welsh referendums on devolution proposals in 1997, the constitutent countries within the United Kingdom were given limited self-government. This was still subject to the ability of the British Parliament in Westminster at will to amend, change, broaden or abolish the devolved governmental systems.

Defense??

As I understand it, Scottish defense is the responsibility of Westminster, but the article makes no mention of the word Defense, even. Most other national articles I've read through (Germany) make a mention of their Defense forces. I figure it should be mentioned here, somewhere. HellaNorCal 00:27, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Germany is a nation state whereas Scotland is a region within a nation state so the topics covered by the articles dont necessarily have to be the same. That said perhaps a short section on the Scottish contribution to the British military might be good to insert. siarach 09:02, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Yea, I know that Scotland doesn't have control of its military, I just thought it should be mentioned. While Scotland is not a sovereign nation state, it is a Nation, one constituent nation of the UK. There is a difference, between a nation and a state. HellaNorCal 05:50, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes there is a difference between a nation and a state but it is one which is, particularly within the UK, hugely overblown and often misunderstood as many of us seem to believe that the UK is somehow different to other nations in being made up of various regions which were formerly sovereign states or as, they are often euphemistically described, 'constituent nations' . When people generally refer to a 'nation' they usually mean a nation-state. Scotland (or England) is no more (or less) a nation than Catalonia, Aragon, Prussia, Brittany, Naples or any formerly sovereign region within an existing nation-state and i doubt very much you would find any reference to 'their' defence forces in their articles. siarach 08:41, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Would it not be appropriate to mention the, very significant, resources of the Armed forces of the United Kingdom which are located in Scotland? For example, the fact that Scotland hosts the UK's entire nuclear arsenal, only a few miles outside the largest city, Glasgow, seems to be a very, very important fact, which certainly deserves a mention in an encyclopaedia article. Eg, see:

• (pdf file) The United Kingdom, Nuclear Weapons, and the Scottish Question
• (pdf file) Trident: Britain’s weapon of mass destruction

or, internally:

• Trident missile
• Vanguard class submarine
• HMNB Clyde
• Nuclear weapons and the United Kingdom

Thanks. --Mais oui! 09:03, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Music and Spam

I am concerned about the ever lengthening list of pop groups in the Scotland#Music section, and that the article may be being improperly used by editors to advertise groups who do not merit listing. I propose that some of the groups listed should be transferred to more specialist Music of Scotland. Any comments? Viewfinder 19:40, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Support. --Mais oui! 09:57, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

We should avoid original research - this list should not be a list of acts we deem worthy, it should a list of acts that a quoted reference have listed. Compare the list of universities in the UK article: United Kingdom#Education and science, discussion: Talk:United Kingdom/Archive 4#Universities. Thanks/wangi 11:17, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I have deleted the unstructured list from the article. I was intending to transfer them to Music of Scotland#Revival but when I read this section I discovered many of them were already there, in a much more structured manner. So I decided not to paste the text that I cut. If a subsequent editor creates a list from a reliable source, then that is, of course, OK by me.

A recent source is the List's "Best Scottish Band Of All Time" top 50... Problem is it was very obviously skewed by eager fans! So it's not very representative to be honest. It's top ten is:

1. Belle & Sebastian
2. Travis
3. Idlewild
4. Wet Wet Wet
5. Sensational Alex Harvey Band
6. Simple Minds
7. Teenage Fanclub
8. Bay City Rollers
9. Primal Scream
10. The Proclaimers

Thanks/wangi 14:48, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Another reason that list shouldn't be used is that Number 14 is Snow Patrol, they are from Northern Ireland, sure they have members from Scotland and formed while at university in Scotland but they aren't Scottish. ≈ Seraph 31 15:32, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Peer review?

Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Nominations are just about to go live. If we want this article to be considered then is now the time to do a Wikipedia:Peer review? --Mais oui! 09:18, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I've requested peer review: Wikipedia:Peer review/Scotland. Would be good to get this article to featured article status too. thanks/wangi 14:57, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Following my grumpy complaint yeaterday, we have actually received some (very detailed) critique. This is an excellent development, and we should follow up the advice given in reply to my Talk page moan, and advertise this peer review more widely. Apparently 2 weeks is a typical duration for peer review, so patience is required (not one of my prime qualities). --Mais oui! 16:32, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

<grin>, you don't say... -- Derek Ross | Talk 16:54, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Country

"a constituent country... The country..." is just bad style, an explanation of why I was reverted would be nice. Thanks. --Lo2u ^{(T • C)} 16:15, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Mais oui. Of course they're not necessarilly the same thing but the article hasn't (at least at this point) specified in what sense, other than as a constituent country of the UK, Scotland might be called a country. Do you not think that, regardless of whether these words are technically different, the opening lines of an article that you want to give featured status should not sound awkward because of repition? Also there's no real need to use the term "country" here - it's fairly ill-defined (and country wasn't even linked) so it adds relatively little to readers' understanding of the political status of Scotland, especially when "nation" and "constituent country" are being used. The next few lines explain exactly in what sense Scotland might be considered a country so nothing is lost by this word's omission. --Lo2u ^{(T • C)} 17:19, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

That makes sense - the lead should not go into such level of complexity, it's all explained fully later on. I'd go for that. /wangi 17:55, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

It has to be said however...

I reverted the following addition:

It has to be said however, that tensions between the two groups have waned in recent years, and both Rangers and Celtic are making substantial efforts to curb sectarianism.

The language just isn't right - far too conversational and without this addition the section stands fine... and who says? References? Thanks/wangi 22:56, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

International law

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding something. The following doesn't seem correct:

Scotland continues to constitute a separate jurisdiction in public international law and private international law.

What the associated reference actually says is that for the purposes of English law, Scotland is regarded as a foreign legal jurisdiction. However the paragraph seems to imply that the UN and foreign countries regard it as a separate country - at least for legal matters which is a slightly bolder statement that needs to be sourced. The paragraph may only need a small alteration/ clarification but I don't think it's quite right as it is now. --Lo2u ^{(T • C)} 16:54, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

The crux of the matter is that Scotland treats England as a foreign jurisdiction, and England does the same to Scotland. The implication for countries outside the UK is minimal because they generally deal with the British government for extradition etc. rather than directly with the Scottish or English legal system. However if there are cases where an overseas legal system has to deal with a UK one, it had better deal with the appropriate one if it wants a satisfactory outcome. There would be no point, say, in applying to an English court to enforce a childcare order on someone living in Aberdeen. This was most recently seen at the Lockerbie trial where the trial was held by Scottish judges under Scots law on Dutch territory. In this case the overseas country involved, Libya, certainly regarded Scotland as a separate entity from England. -- Derek Ross | Talk 17:07, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. That's what I thought. I suppose the problem is that the paragraph is slightly ambiguous - the first time I read this I didn't think it meant that Scotland constitutes a de facto separate international legal jurisdiction from England but that international law applies to the two separately, as if Scotland could make its own treaties with France for example. I think it needs to be clarified even if it's not entirely wrong. --Lo2u ^{(T • C)} 17:23, 6 August 2006 (UTC)