Talk:Angus, Scotland

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Angus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070611100003/http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/catalogue/adsdata/PSAS_2002/pdf/vol_125/125_029_067.pdf to http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/catalogue/adsdata/PSAS_2002/pdf/vol_125/125_029_067.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 07:18, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Angus. 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/20070611100003/http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/catalogue/adsdata/PSAS_2002/pdf/vol_125/125_029_067.pdf to http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/catalogue/adsdata/PSAS_2002/pdf/vol_125/125_029_067.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:30, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 14 March 2017

 * 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. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Move Angus to Angus, Scotland and Angus (disambiguation) to Angus. (non-admin closure) Kostas20142 (talk) 14:17, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

– There is no primary topic for this term, none of the entries on the dab could be thought of as having long term significance. Making a local area the primary topic also gives the impression of systematic bias towards a certain area. -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 00:27, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Angus → Angus City Council
 * Angus (disambiguation) → Angus
 * Comment: Looking at Category:Council areas of Scotland, where this article is currently is in, the proposed title should be instead be the parenthetical disambiguation name Angus (council area) for title consistency with the other articles in that category. I'm otherwise neutral regarding the actual merits of primary topic. Zzyzx11 (talk) 01:44, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
 * There is no reason that an article titled Angus, Scotland could not be in Category:Council areas of Scotland. Andrewa (talk) 21:28, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose Angus isn't a city. Also the historical shires were only renamed "council areas" in 1996, this is still the county of Angus article - and the county of Angus is as old as any of the Category:Counties of Scotland (or indeed Category:Counties of England like Dorset or Norfolk), the cattle etc. are named after the county. Just as things are named after other ancient Scottish counties. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:43, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
 * As noted below, what is named after what is not a valid argument concerning primary topic. So how about Angus, Scotland as a title? See . Andrewa (talk) 21:28, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Still oppose, Angus is Angus. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:23, 26 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Strongest possible oppose Angus is not a city. And it is not a council. It has had historical precedent for the name dating back to the 8th century, and all other uses of the name ultimately derive from it. To rename it would be akin to renaming India because there are other uses of that name.  Catfish  Jim  and the soapdish  08:20, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
 * But I note that you are happy with Angus, Scotland as a title. correct? Andrewa (talk) 21:28, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Support Angus (disambiguation) → Angus. I also support moving the current article at Angus somewhere, but I'm not sure if the proposed location is the best option. Long story short, I think there's strong evidence that at least in the United States, the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the word "Angus" is Angus cattle (even stronger than its historical use; for a similar reference, see Gouda), but since that's obviously not a world-wide view, the disambiguation page should be moved to the base title. Steel1943  (talk) 22:36, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment A more appropriate example is Hereford and Hereford (cattle). Angus cattle is, in any case, not a valid name for the breed. The breed is known as Aberdeen Angus cattle everywhere other than the US and is differentiated to either Black Angus or Red Angus in the US.  Catfish  Jim  and the soapdish  17:45, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Your statement applies exclusively to the cattle: the PRIMARYTOPIC claim refers to its beef. In the US, the beef is best known as just "angus". And since the beef comes from the cattle, differentiating the two is a very blurry line. Steel1943  (talk) 20:35, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but that doesn't wash. You go anywhere in the world and say the word "Gouda" and it means a specific type of cheese. Ask anyone in Gouda where you can buy some Gouda and they will point you in the direction of a cheese shop. Go into a butchers in Angus and ask for some Angus and they look at you blankly or laugh at you. The word "Angus" by itself is an adjective when applied to beef. You say "Angus beef" not just "Angus". And in any case it's called "Aberdeen Angus beef" everywhere except the US. A similar situation exists for Kobe and Kobe beef.  Catfish   Jim  and the soapdish  21:10, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Just FYI before I read more into this statement: The affinity for the word Kobe, in the US, isn't exclusive to Kobe beef; the word's affinity with Kobe Bryant is just as strong. Steel1943  (talk) 22:34, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * And George Bush's cat was called India (cat)... so what? We disambiguate India?  Catfish  Jim  and the soapdish  23:15, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * ...George Bush had a cat? Steel1943  (talk) 23:29, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * [[File:India_the_Cat_Miss_Beazley_and_Barney_Halloween_2007_(cropped).jpg]]
 * It really upset some people in India.  Catfish  Jim  and the soapdish  10:31, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Heh! The cat doesn't look too pleased about it either! -- Derek Ross &#124; Talk 17:18, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * ...As for the rest of your statement ... your statement, in one way, validates my argument regarding "Angus". If one is in Angus (the current subject at Angus), what you said could very well happen, but in the US, a salesperson of meat (or really any grocery or restaurant) would understand that their customer is inquiring about the beef from Angus cattle. Considering that a good portion of the readers of the English Wikipedia are in the US, the current setup of article titles has systemic bias which caters exclusively to non-US English speakers/readers. Steel1943  (talk) 22:39, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * You're exaggerating more than a little there. Anyway, even if the salesperson of meat would be able to figure out such a request, nobody goes into a shop in the US and just asks for some "Angus". They might ask for Gouda though.  Catfish  Jim  and the soapdish  23:15, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * the majority of the world's English readers live in India and Africa so its not systematic bias that what words mean to the majority of the worlds English readers is taken into account. But even in the US "Angus" is not used in US for cattle, other than for "Angus cattle" found in some US books. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:42, 16 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Support Angus → Angus (council area). I'd be interested to see pageviews here. Dohn joe (talk) 14:00, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Pageviews of what? Angus is the only highly notable subject called "Angus". Angus cattle are not called just "Angus" period. In ictu oculi (talk) 19:35, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Readers in the US, for the most part, don't know the difference. "Angus" refers to the beef, so being redirected the cattle would make sense for US readers. (But again, I know it's not a worldwide view, thus why I'm suggesting he disambiguation page move to the ambiguous title.) Steel1943  (talk) 20:35, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, that's just not right on either count. To the pageviews, I suppose: 1) the |Angus,_Nebraska|Angus,_Texas|Angus_(given_name)|Angus_(surname)|Angus_(film)|Angus_(Scottish_Parliament_constituency)|Angus_(UK_Parliament_constituency)|Angus_(disambiguation) top 10 (you can only enter 10) pages of things called Angus (even excluding the cattle breed for now) show that the council area does not even have a bare majority of views. The film (with Kathy Bates, George C. Scott, et al) and the given name article are both relatively popular and significant. So, at a minimum, the basename should be moved to the disambiguation page. And 2) the cattle breed is obviously often referred to as "Angus": ("breeds such as Hereford or Angus are calmer than continental breeds"). So, |Angus_cattle|Angus,_Nebraska|Angus,_Texas|Angus_(given_name)|Angus_(film)|Angus_(Scottish_Parliament_constituency)|Angus_(UK_Parliament_constituency)|Angus_(disambiguation) adding in "Angus cattle" to the pageviews analysis shows the breed with nearly 2/3rds of the pageviews for "Angus" articles. And the cattle breed is certainly at least on a par with the Scottish council area for significance. So by all rights, the basename should redirect to the cattle article as a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT. Dohn joe (talk) 20:46, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * If you take out a trivial 1995 childrens film (obviously trivial entertainment subjects like films and albums hoover up massive page views) the encyclopedic subjects left are all centered on the ancient and modern Scottish county. It's one of those few cases where there genuinely is a real WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, and while "apple" still directs to the fruit, rather than the brand, no reason why a county should be unseated by its cow In ictu oculi (talk) 07:37, 16 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Oppose. The orginal proposal made no sense as there has never been a city council called Angus, but the article covers not just the council area, but also the registration county, the lieutenancy area, the district, the county and the kingdom, all of which have existed at one time or another with slight variations in boundaries. --Deskford (talk) 15:09, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment: Then how about the alternative proposal of Angus, Scotland, below? Andrewa (talk) 21:02, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose. This is the primary topic from which all other uses of Angus are derived. -- Derek Ross &#124; Talk 19:53, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment: If the only reason for thinking it's the primary topic is that it's the one from which all other uses of Angus are derived, that's not a valid argument at all. See the example of Boston/Boston, Lincolnshire given beolw, and many, many others. Andrewa (talk) 21:02, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Support Angus (disambiguation) → Angus. Similar to how Cheddar is a disambiguation page, again involving a place in the UK and a food named after that place. Boston is named after Boston but that doesn't seem to be problematic. f  eminist  14:24, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
 * That would be well and good if there was a food called Angus. There's not. There is "Aberdeen Angus beef" that is called "Angus Beef" in one country, but it is not just called "Angus" anywhere. Cheddar and Gouda are different as the cheeses are genuinely, and generally, referred to by their mononyms. Angus beef is not.  Catfish  Jim  and the soapdish  22:38, 20 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Support Angus (disambiguation) → Angus. The local government area meets neither of the criteria normally used to determine a primary topic. Andrewa (talk) 05:34, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * And see below for the new name of this article. Andrewa (talk) 16:53, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Support move to Angus (council area), per and, and the dab page to Angus. The claim that Angus cattle and their beef isn't known as just "Angus" in various contexts is demonstrably incorrect; in a cursory search I find many sources that do so in different countries.. In North America, there's even an American Angus Association located at angus.org. Additionally, there's is the highly notable name Angus (given name) and its variants like Aengus (given name) and Aonghas (given name). And finally, the name of the Irish mythological figure Aengus is often written Angus, as are the names of Óengus I and Óengus II of the Picts, among others. Under no definition is the council area the primary topic of the term "Angus".--Cúchullain t/ c  19:14, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Even without looking at Angus cattle, the council area does not have a majority of views among several ambiguous subjects, despite being at the base name.|Angus_(given_name)|Aengus|Angus_cattle|Angus_(film)|%C3%93engus_I|%C3%93engus_II|%C3%93engus_of_Tallaght--Cúchullain t/ c 19:20, 21 March 2017 (UTC)


 * WP:CONCEPTDAB. All uses derive from the historic area of Angus, which is not the same thing as the current Angus local government area.  Either make a CONCEPTDAB page, or make a new article on the history of Angusshire.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:41, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
 * True of the cows, but the name "Angus", figures such as Aengus or Oengus I (both also known as Angus), and others aren't derived from this council area.--Cúchullain t/ c 02:28, 23 March 2017 (UTC)


 * To the suggested location, oppose. As others have said, Angus is not a city nor as a region is it primarily a council area (unlike, for instance, 'Highland' or 'Dumfries and Galloway'). It is a traditional region and province of Scotland. Scottish provinces pose some naming challenges for the guidelines because they are neither represented by modern administrative structures nor are they out of use as concepts (both in historical writing and modern community identities); nor when they are represented by modern structures are they represented coherently. When a province happens to be, also, a modern administrative area, like Fife, Moray or Angus or even a defunct modern administrative area like Argyll, Ross or Tweeddale, having separate articles fragments the content and leaves the encyclopedia much poorer. Non-Scottish Wikipedians will find these issues difficult to understand and will expect to be able to impose the closest thing Scotland has analogous administrative units in the USA, Australia, etc. As things stand, Wikipedia has no standard guidelines for Scottish provinces/districts but precedents suggest that Province, Scotland is strongest standard: e.g. Lorne, Scotland, Carrick, Scotland--but the sample size is small and it is not standard: e.g. Eskdale (Scotland), Kyle, Ayrshire and until recently Lennox was at Lennox (district).

I suspect that most Wikipedian contributors will not care about how Scottish provinces are treated, so long as the disambiguation problem is resolved. I find it unlikely that the long-standing location of the Angus article is so problematic as to cause serious issues and the desire to rationalize unnecessarily not clearly helpful, it does also seem that the case for this page remaining at Angus is not a clear one, since even in Scottish use the personal name is at least as prominent as the region name. I think the best solution, if the page absolutely had to move, is probably Angus, Scotland. Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 17:25, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Angus, Scotland, or Angus (region) as I suggested below, would both be suitable to me.--Cúchullain t/ c 20:18, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Likewise. Dohn joe (talk) 21:40, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Alternative proposal

 * Support move to Angus, Scotland and move of the DAB to the base name as proposed. Covers all bases. Andrewa (talk) 16:45, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Let us try to give max help to any intending closer.

,, I think you all now support this too, correct me if I'm wrong.

, not sure of your exact position on this.

, still opposed to moving the DAB? Andrewa (talk) 00:34, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Discussion
Several oppose !votes above note that the cattle etc. are named after the area. If this were Andrewpedia I might well accept such an argument as relevant to deciding a primary topic,, but it's not, and the policy here is clear that this is not a consideration. Andrewa (talk) 05:39, 21 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Here there are two relevant points when it comes to deciding a primary topic. One is usage, which it has been argued is greater for the cattle/beef. I have several issues with this... one is that the cattle/beef is not known primarily as "Angus". The opening sentence from Angus cattle: Angus cattle, known as Aberdeen Angus in most parts of the world, are a breed of cattle commonly used in beef production. Secondly, Angus is not generally used mononymously to refer to be cattle/beef. It was pointed out above however that, in the scope of an article about cattle/beef that can be shortened to just "Angus". There is merit in debating primary usage but we have a situation in which a subject "Angus" (the place) is known only as "Angus". The other subject "Angus cattle" is known primarily as "Aberdeen Angus Cattle" or "Angus Cattle" or "Aberdeen Angus beef" or "Angus beef" and, only sometimes, where the context is clear as "Angus".


 * Primary long term significance, on the other hand, cannot be argued. Angus was a kingdom in Pictish times, going back to the early medieval period. Aberdeen Angus beef/cattle does not have long term significance. Certified beef has been around since the late 1970s, but much of the current interest in the product started in the early 2000s, with the fast food industry promoting it as a premium product.  Catfish  Jim  and the soapdish  20:18, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Jim is right. In addition I'd point out that "Angus (council area)" is a very poor title. The article does not just describe the council area, it describes the region which has at various times been a kingdom, a county and a district. And the first two for much longer than it has been a council area. -- Derek Ross &#124; Talk 14:57, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't have any of my resources on me at present, but to my recollection there was never a kingdom called "Angus". The region itself has had different names over time and it's hard to argue it is the primary topic over Angus (given name), Aengus, Oengus I, Oengus II (all also called "Angus") plus the breed of cow. Angus (region) or similar would also be a good title depending on what the scope of the article should be.--Cúchullain t/ c 02:35, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
 * According to, it was a kingdom. That's the standard textbook for that period. The kingdom is traditionally associated with an older kingdom known as Circinn and the name change is likely to have taken place in the 8th C AD (named after Oengus I) but that's largely conjectural.
 * Given names? Miles away from primary usage.  Catfish   Jim  and the soapdish  09:25, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. Still, the region's name has changed a number of times (Circinn, Angus, Forfarshire) and there are many other notable things of the same name (several of which predate the region).
 * Re the given name, the point is there is no primary usage. The region is not more historically significant than the mythological figure or the Pictish king it's apparently named for, nor is it the primary topic in terms of usage out of all topics of the name.|Angus_(given_name)|Aengus|Angus_cattle|Angus_(film)|Óengus_I|Óengus_II|Óengus_of_TallaghtCúchullain t/ c 13:11, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Angus, Scotland would be acceptable.  Catfish  Jim  and the soapdish  09:37, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * It's certainly better than the original suggestion. -- Derek Ross &#124; Talk 17:18, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * , is it acceptable to you? The goal here is to build consensus. Best of all, if you could cast a positive or even neutral !vote at, that would be a great help to the closer IMO. (And there are several other contributors who could help similarly.) Andrewa (talk) 22:16, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I'd still prefer to leave the article at its present location. But if it is definitely going to be moved, then it should be moved to "Angus, Scotland". -- Derek Ross &#124; Talk 02:49, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I think we might even have consensus on this! Not that it's mine to call. Noting that the proposed target Angus, Scotland has neither significant history nor a talk page, so non-admin closure might be possible. Caution: It would be necessary to suppress the redirect creation when moving this article, to make room for the DAB talk page in the second move (owing to a long-standing software bug). I don't know whether a non-admin can do this. BUT if you have trouble, just do the first move (the article) and close the RM and drop me a line on my talk page, and I'll clean up (that's why we call adminship the mop). I can't close this as I'm involved, but happy to clean up. Andrewa (talk) 17:07, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * As main opposition to the proposed move, I'd be happy for you to do the move Andrew.  Catfish  Jim  and the soapdish  20:16, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, in view of the backlog at RM I'm tempted... but I'd have to then say that if anyone objects I'll revert and relist rather than going to WP:MR. Neater if someone else does, so I'll wait a little at least. Andrewa (talk) 23:18, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * In fact the more I think about it the more I think I should not. The discussion is quite involved, and I'm clearly involved (->. Surely there'a a better closer available. Andrewa (talk) 22:12, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Page movers are capable of performing redirect suppression, and in a nutshell, performing these moves in the way they need to be done. Steel1943  (talk)|
 * OK... but without page mover authority, not so? Thank you! Andrewa (talk) 23:05, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I must admit, I am confused about the point of this inquiry... Steel1943  (talk) 23:16, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * As I said above, I think a non-admin close would be OK. But I'm not sure whether they have the required permissions to do it neatly. You seem to be saying they don't, as I suspected, I just wanted to be sure. Andrewa (talk) 23:21, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see. Yes, the only non-admins that can suppress redirects after a page move are ones who have the Page mover user right. Steel1943  (talk) 23:58, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * In which case my offer to clean up is material, that's the significant thing. Andrewa (talk) 20:48, 25 March 2017 (UTC)


 * I finally got around to writing an essay on this common error, or at least starting one. See What is named after what. Andrewa (talk) 09:30, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

I seem to have been omitted from the list of contributors pinged above, but for the record I remain opposed to the move. The page has been at this name for twelve years and I don't see that anything has changed to make its subject no longer primary. As has been argued above, the term "Angus" is only used as a shorthand for Angus cattle or Angus beef when it is clear from the context that cattle or beef are being discussed. The other topics that may lay claim to long-term significance are the given name and surname, but these are already covered in articles with parenthetic disambiguation. --Deskford (talk) 13:03, 31 March 2017 (UTC)


 * My preferred outcome is also that it stays at its present location. Angus, Scotland would be more acceptable than any of the other suggested page moves, but I think, reviewing the above, that this is similar to the Apple/Apple Inc. question and should be decided by consensus.  Catfish  Jim  and the soapdish  13:06, 31 March 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Angus, Scotland. 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 http://www.webcitation.org/6Mh6OWXuH?url=http://www.angus.gov.uk/history/features/buildings/arbabbey.htm to http://www.angus.gov.uk/history/features/buildings/arbabbey.htm

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) 04:30, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Council boundaries vs Historic County
The statement "The boundaries of the present council area are the same as those of the historic county minus the City of Dundee..." is not entirely true as before the boundaries were tied up in the 19th century Angus/Forfarshire was a little different - if you go back far enough places like Invergowrie and Coupar Angus were in Angus, but are currently in Perth and Kinross. Dunarc (talk) 23:57, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 29 October 2019

 * 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.  Calidum   13:38, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Angus is very accurately and honestly the council area of Scotland. Euanjohnb (talk) 19:40, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
 * See the history section, this doesn't appear to just deal with the current council area but also the former county also once called Forfarshire.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 19:53, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose since the rationale is unclear. Why is the current title with natural disambiguation not preferable? Dicklyon (talk) 03:09, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The current title is fine and Angus was also once a county. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:00, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose. It was a pointless request two years ago and it's still a pointless request. -- Derek Ross &#124; Talk 02:00, 31 October 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.