Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scotland

Merge discussion at 2024 Scottish government crisis
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:2024 Scottish government crisis, which is within the scope of this WikiProject. There is a proposal to merge this article into Bute House Agreement. Clyde1998 (talk) 10:29, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Ae Fond Kiss...
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Ae Fond Kiss... that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 14:21, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Robert Gordon University – Garthdee campus


The article Robert Gordon University – Garthdee campus has been proposed for deletion&#x20;because of the following concern: "This whole page reads like an overly detailed promotional pamphlet for the Robert Gordon University, and the main Robert Gordon University article has most, if not all, of the useful information from this article in its Garthdee campus section"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. UltrasonicMadness (talk) 01:03, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Nationality discussion at Talk:Snow Patrol
There is a discussion currently ongoing at Talk:Snow Patrol regarding a controversial change in the band's nationality, which may be of interest to project members. The discussion is titled Change Snow Patrol from Scottish Rock Band to Northern Irish Rock Band. Thanks. HorrorLover555 (talk) 16:27, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:James V of Scotland
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:James V of Scotland that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Векочел (talk) 02:36, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Ae Fond Kiss (song)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Ae Fond Kiss (song) that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 22:17, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

RFC at RSN: The Telegraph on trans issues
Hello! There is an RFC at the reliable sources noticeboard regarding a subject relevant to this Wikiproject. BilledMammal (talk) 06:44, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

UK sub-national geographic flags discussion
I've opened a new discussion at WikiProject:UK geography about sub-national UK flags, including historic county and council area flags. Anyone is welcome to participate. A.D.Hope (talk) 10:12, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Bloating in Gaels articles
I’ve become aware of similarities in some problematic aspects in various articles regarding notable Scottish Gaels. The major concern is the inclusion of large passages of material which, though arguably broadly related, does not really apply directly to the subject of the articles in question, making the articles bloated and unfocused. As a recent example, I’ve just removed these sections from the Alexander Cameron (priest) article, which included original research about the subject’s not being covered in popular culture but that a beach connected with him had been, as well as much material about the historical period but not directly about the subject’s part in or relation to it. I haven’t tackled this long section of the article yet but it appears to directly feature the subject only occasionally. Other examples are Dòmhnall Ruadh Chorùna, which included various off-topic passages and this material at Iain Lom.

Outwith the category of notable Gaels, inclusion of material such as this at Catholic Church in Scotland may be related. That the source material relates to an organisation that is most notable for their hostility to the subject of the article but does not in fact regard the latter is an impressive find.

Accompanying common characteristics are editorialising language, reverential, adulatory or POV phrasing, questionable capitalisations of terms, questionable ENGVAR spellings and terms (e.g., variously, “Meanwhile,” “However,” “the Bard”, “’’posse’’ of Redcoats”).

It may be circumstantial but each of these articles has been edited extensively by User:K1ngstowngalway1, so pinging them as a courtesy.

The articles I have listed may benefit from further attention and pruning but I am concerned that there may be others similarly affected. Has anyone else noted such? Mutt Lunker (talk) 12:22, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Alasdair mac Mhaighstir Alasdair - various sections. Ben   Mac  Dui  15:13, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Ah yes, that rings a bell. Looks like I may have clocked this in 2020 but didn't address much and the issues have amplified significantly in the interim. Also to note, the earlier campaign was by User:Kingstowngalway, without the inclusion of the two number "1"s, per the current editor's similar handle. Mutt Lunker (talk) 16:10, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Some highly partial and choice phrasing throughout. "the Whig single party state's apologists"! I've also seen this unfounded claim in other articles: "It is widely believed that Whig poet Robert Burns was the first Poet Laureate of Scotland." To my knowledge, this is never claimed, the post being non-existent, and Burns notably expressing as much in the way of Jacobite sympathies in his works. The bulk of the article comes across as pretty questionable. Mutt Lunker (talk) 16:28, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * If this edit, summarised "As my use of period spellings and capitalisations has been cited as a problem, I have corrected them in this section." is in reponse to the above, it shows an erroneous understanding. Quotes should be represented as they were. Secondary to the the issue of the lack of discrimination in the large quantitty of material being added as it is, this issue is with your own text, where you routinely use non-British and culturally inappropriate terms and spellings and you capitalise terms which do not require to be.
 * As I become more familiar with the edits, I am increasingly concerned about issues of neutrality with these articles. The articles are essay-like, a "case" appears to being built, those on one "side" are referred to reverentially, those perceived as on the other with contempt, contemptible though many of them may be. I suspect the sourcing may be partial and original research, not warranted by the sources, appears to be being inserted. Mutt Lunker (talk) 22:04, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Can anyone suggest a way forward with the problems in these articles as the task of sorting through all the material would be considerable?

I've taken a look at the lead section of Alasdair mac Mhaighstir Alasdair alone and it's a vast a miscellany of material about the subject, in no particular order and in no way fulfilling the function of "an introduction to an article and a summary of its most important contents". Much of the material therein would be of questionable pertinence to the main body, let alone the lead.

Much of the material that has been added, largely by one individual, may of worth and pertinence and well sourced but it's difficult to assess this, the articles having been swamped, the tone reverential, the structure incoherent. (On sourcing, as a tabloid, is The National regarded as a RS?)

The best good start would be if User:K1ngstowngalway1 could cease the addition of any new material until they have gone over what they have already added, excising off-topic material, addressing the tone. and removing material not supported by their sources, or synthesised from them. Failing that, it seems drastic but would reverting to versions before the swamping of the articles be acceptable to the community? Is putting them up for assessment a suitable way of formally noting deficiencies and indicating appropriate action? Mutt Lunker (talk) 13:31, 26 June 2024 (UTC)


 * This is, after all, a collaborative project and I am certainly okay with that fact. I do believe that history is nuanced and complex and I do try to bring that across when editing
 * whenever possiblIf, as often seems to be the case about important figures in the Scottish Gaelic literary canon, the limited sources I have are only reverential in tone, it can be difficult to convey nuance unless I find it in other sources over time. Sometimes canonical poets live lives that are inspirational and other times contemptible, but we are all trying in our edits to be as objective as humanly possible and to correct bias whenever we see it. With regard to Alasdair Mac Mhaighstir Alasdair, I have included that he was unfaithful to his wife and was also obscenely dirty, and I mean filthy and borderline pornographic, in a number of his poems. I have chosen not to attack him morally for those facts and to simply reported them impassively as possible. I have also also added, however, that repeated expurgation of those same poems over the past 200 years has attracted very harsh criticism from a number of literary scholars, including the late John Lorne Campbell, despite the latter having been a very staunch adherent of Traditionalist Catholicism. Regarding Dòmhnall Ruadh Chorùna, I personally find his expressed desire in "The Song of the Poison", for the complete annihilation of the German people by fire from heaven to be horrifying, which is why I found it so ironic to learn many years into researching him and expanding his article that his first experience of poison gas was actually in a friendly fire incident. It certainly brings home how badly that war was fought by both sides and how wasteful and unnecessary it was, but even so I added that information to put the poem into context while trying not to judge Dòmhnall. I am trying to take your concerns into account and am looking forward to working with you to improve these articles. Best Wishes.K1ngstowngalway1 (talk) 16:41, 26 June 2024 (UTC)e.

Regarding the bloating of the articles, I see you have made a few edits in that regard at Alasdair mac Mhaighstir Alasdair but much more is required. The issues of tone and bias can be dealt with more easily when the material has been trimmed and made more focused. This is only a quick and rough start at the lead, but these edits at Alexander Cameron (priest) might give you an indication of some of the issues that are required to bring more focus to the various articles and to reduce bias. Please can you take on more trimming? (And any others who'd care to; I see there has been some intervention.) Mutt Lunker (talk) 09:56, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I've noted concerns about neutrality and tone specific to Alexander Cameron here, though there are similar issues at other articles mentioned above. Mutt Lunker (talk) 20:32, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I've just clocked that the article is overwhelmingly sourced to a single work and this is self-published. That surely throws the reliability of the article in grave doubt. This returns me to my inclination that the only way to address the multiple issues is to revert to a version prior to the intervention. Mutt Lunker (talk) 10:58, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * This would appear to be suitable revision, without the swathes of self-pub material, tone and neutrality issues and considerably more focused. Mutt Lunker (talk) 11:14, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I held off from restoring this last credible revision when I saw that a small number of passages, reliant on the self-published source, had had additional sources, potentially more credible, noted at these passages. I'd hoped that this may indicate a start to the very sizeable task of properly sourcing the material, or purging that only supported by the questionable source. To remove the self-pub tag after these minimal tweaks shows some front and a complete lack of appreciation of the task in hand. The reference section indicates the majority of the numerous citations are to this one work which should, ideally, not be being used at all. Mutt Lunker (talk) 10:39, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Considerable editing continues to the article, none in any signicant way to remove the mass of material reliant on the self-pub source. A week's wait seems long enough, so last good version it is. Mutt Lunker (talk) 12:09, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I have come across something similar now at Eigg. However, in my absence for a year or three the whole article, (not just Gaelic era history) once close to GA status, is now so full of unsourced statements and absurd footnotes that I fear it is not really salvageable.  Ben   Mac  Dui  10:41, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Oh dear, so I see. I remember the article being very good at the time of a visit to Eigg a few years ago but much of it has nose-dived since. I've encountered numerous other articles so-affected. Eigg would be considerably improved with a straight revert to its GA-proximal version. Such action at the Cameron article was met with reversion, removal of maintenance templates, no effort to address sourcing concerns and a doubling down of the addition of bloat. One characterstic of the editing is the packing of the text with very lengthy quotes. This may have a copyvio side issue.
 * Not all the edits may be so-motivated but a good indication of a fooist agenda is that criticism of edits must be inspired by anti-fooism, so make what you will of this. Mutt Lunker (talk) 12:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Shapinsay at FAR
Shapinsay was nominated for a featured article review in November of last year. I had dealt with the bulk of the queries by March this year. After some additional input there has been no further comment for over a month. However, so far only one editor has been kind enough to support FA status being retained. The discussion page is at Featured article review/Shapinsay/archive1 and any input is welcome. Ben  Mac  Dui  08:28, 30 June 2024 (UTC)