User talk:MacRusgail/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Joelmills (talk | contribs) at 03:31, 27 June 2006 (Lavellan). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Barnstar

I, V. Molotov, hereby give you this barnstar for participation in VfDs.

Molotov (talk) 21:14, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. First time I've been decorated. --MacRusgail 15:32, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Minor Barnstar

In recognition of your many good minor edits. Reyk 22:58, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • My pleasure. You deserve it. Reyk 23:18, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dwelly project

Category:Dwelly This category is for articles incorporating text from “Dwelly’s [Scottish] Gaelic Dictionary” (1911) by Edward Dwelly, from that dictionary's encyclopedic entries (rather than just definitions). Where possible/suitable, an English translation is used as the title:

Done (22/03/06)

Aoghairean, Aois-dàna, Brownie (elf) (Uruisg), Canntaireachd, Ciud-siorraig, Clann-an-oistir, Clay-body (Corp-creadha), Còmhla-bhigein, Crann-nan-gad, Crois-iarna (Iron Cross is taken), Crom Dubh (Crum-dubh), Cuirm, Daugh (Dabhach), Druids' glass (Gloine), Druineach, Foot plough (Cas-chrom etc), Force-fire (Tein'-eigin), Lavellan (Labh-allan), liaghra], Long Èireannach, Lèine bhàn, MacGillonie (Sguaban-stothaidh), Matron's badge (Bréid), Muc-sheilch, Ounceland (Unga, Peighinn etc), Oxgang (do.), Pennyland (do.), Religion of the Yellow Stick (Creideamh...), Scottish Gaelic personal naming system (names appendix), Slinneanachd, Sunwise (deiseal), Taghairm, Traditional dyes of the Scottish Highlands (dath), Tulchan (Tulachan), Wonder tuft (Tom-an-ioghnaidh)

Also incorporating some text from Dwelly

To do

Additional

Improve Edward Dwelly's biography.

Re: Edinburgh Suburbs

There's defintely quite a bit of work needed, but hopefully we can get quite a bit done! I'll probably pop into the Edinburgh Room in the George IV Bridge library sometime next week, and I'll try and get a few good books out to add some information to the sparser/non-existant entries. I've seen the mess the Corstorphine entry is in, I live at East Craigs so it's my end of town anyway, I'll see if I can do something about fixing that as well. I'm also hoping to get some more written about Cramond, Barnton and Gogar, as well as starting the 'Cammo' article.

I've also got a large number of photographs that I've taken in and around Edinburgh, so I'll use those to illustrate articles when necessary. Pinkyogamuffin 17:43, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've been thinking of going out for a wander with my camera, so perhaps we could try and co-ordinate, which pictures to take. Corstorphine Kirk needs a picture, and Cramond can be easily fixed. I want to start a new article for Cramond Island. BTW, I have plenty of info on Cammo. In fact I've a whole book on it, which some lad brought out about ten years ago, and the Maitland-Tennant family. Very interesting. That's one I've been planning to start. --MacRusgail 17:07, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea. Regarding Cramond Island, it just so happens that I've started an art project inspired by the place, and in particular the abandoned WW2-era buildings there. I've been searching out all the information I can about it, so I'd be happy to help out with that one. Also, I've read that very same book on Cammo that you have, it was a few years ago so the details are a little hazy in my mind, but I remember it was an interesting read. I go there often and have quite literally hundreds of pictures of the place! Pinkyogamuffin 20:01, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I hope you don't mind, but I've gone ahead and started the Cramond Island article myself. Some of my writing is a bit clumsy and could definitely stand to be edited, but I think I've put most of the important information in. I've also got a few photos to add. Also, thought I better mention the places I have a lot of photos of, to save us any double work! I have plenty of photos of: Cammo, Newhaven, Cramond, Gogar, the Old Town, the Water of Leith, the River Almond, the Dalmeny Estate, South Queensferry, Rosslyn, Seton Sands, Arthur's Seat, the Botanic Gardens, Leith and probably a few other places I'm forgetting! :) (P.S: To save any confustion, 'Struan' is a nickname...I'm still Pinkyogamuffin.) Struan 16:26, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is perfectly okay, I was intending to do so at some point. I will have to dig about, but I have photos of Arthur's Seat (hasn't everyone?!), Corstorphine, Craigmillar Castle, Inchcolm etc amongst others. I may go round on a free day and take some pics... however, as you know, the light isn't great just now. --MacRusgail 20:24, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tillicoultry

Hello, I do a bit of work on the Tillicoultry page. I noticed your gaelic proficiency on wiki:babel, so I thought I'd ask- The Tillicoultry pages states "Tillicoultry (Tullich Cul Tir in Scots Gaelic - "At the foot of the hills")". Can you verify this? Is it correct? Cheers. Hellinterface 21:19, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing this out. Personally I doubt it, it reminds me of the derivations given by various ministers in the Statistical Account. I look up what it is in modern Gaelic, and it is "Tulach Cultaire" but I am not sure how close this is to the original. Tilly almost certain represents tulach, a mound, which appears in other placenames as "Tully"/"Tullie"/"Tulloch" etc I'm going to do some research on this. --MacRusgail 21:30, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers for the speedy response! I've also seen it described as meaning "hill in the back land", don't know if that is any help. Hellinterface 10:11, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gaelic Traditionalism

Agus Tapadh Leibh for attaching the NPOV tag, as well as your valiant attempts to clarify the situation for the initial authors of the article. As the initial authors are new to Wikipedia, it seems they are unfamiliar with many Wiki conventions, such as NPOV and the purpose of Talk pages, let alone how to transform their personal essay into something suitable for Wikipedia. Thankfully, some determined souls have just plunged in and begun the editing. I would encourage you to help with this if you can stomach it, as your expertise in the area of traditional culture is valuable, and a needed counterpoint to what is currently there. The piece is so thoroughly POV the edits will need to be quite bold if anything of it is to be salvaged, but so far the initial authors actually seem to appreciate the moves that have been made in that direction. Martin MacGrath 23:41, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your kind comments. I'm not sure I'm really up to doing the whole process of editing the entire article but it seemed obvious they needed a kickstart on NPOV. Despite numerous suggestions about it and general Wikipedia standards, they seemed mired in an argumentative process that didn't seem to be going anywhere. I can only hope that, with the small example I edited to guide them, some positive progress can be made. I'll be trying to keep my hand in it. Please consider keeping up with the article. Your input and feedback on the subject is very refreshing and, in my opinion, needed. Your suggestions and points appeared reasonable and valid to me. --Mac 05:13, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I thought you might be interested to know that I have done significant work on the Gaelic Traditionalism article. If you have a chance to pop by and give some feedback, I'd appreciate it. It is significantly shorter and more NPOV now. Not perfect, but much better, IMHO. I've also archived a good bit of the talk page so it isn't such a monster to navigate. --Mac 23:18, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • The POV and non-encyclopedic tone is creeping back in already. What needs to be addressed is the current contributor's insistence that those who disagree with his views are "non-Traditionalists". He seems convinced he can radically redefine Gaelic terminology and beliefs and then claim the broader culture is wrong. I think you were most persuasive in demonstrating that they cannot claim their minority views are "Traditionalist" when they are in disagreement with Gaelic traditional culture. --Martin MacGrath 22:50, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think what's needed is a few more eyes on the page. I've been spreading the word round, and I have also listed it in several places as a contentious page. Not only does he "redefine" Gaelic terminology, he in fact uses pseudo-Gaelic in many places... I've nothing against learners' Gaelic, which will have faults etc, but when it pretends to be some ancient thing (note the MODERN Irish spelling used too), it's simply bogus. --MacRusgail 19:18, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps you could take a look at the Gaelic Traditionalism article which atm is bordering on dispute. Ive inserted (and later had removed by the author) a disclaimer line - "This movement has little support amongst the remaining Gaelic communities of Scotland or Ireland." - pointing out the movements lack of a basis in the genuine Gaelic communities of Scotland and Ireland but could do with some alternate views and input on the matter. The article itself is of dubious encyclopedia quality imo but that is as aside, my problem with it is that it gives the misleading impression that there is a genuine connection between the article matter and the Gaels/Gaidhealtachd/Gaeltachts of the two Gaelic nations. Le Meas, siarach 00:36, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Updated DYK query Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Cuttie-stool, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Place names United Kingdom

Hi. I was looking at place names in the United Kingdom beginning with C, which is still being wikified and noticed that someone appears to have lost the places between Castle Ashby and Ceann a Bhaigh. I am new to wikipedia so i'm not sure if i've correctly spotted the data loss was a result of a change you made or if it was someone else.--Alistair.swanson 00:31, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chanter / Practice chanter merge proposal

The merge sounds like a good idea. I am the original (and still about 95% author) of the practice chanter article. The reason they are separate is because I have been playing the practice chanter and have only just recently started on the bagpipes, so didn't feel qualified to write anything about that instrument. It does look like the chanter article needs to be expanded somewhat in addition to the adducemtn of the practice chanter material. I do believe the practice chanter should be discussed separately (though in the same article) since it is the instrument that folks start out on.

The photos are mine and I have been meaning for some time to re-shoot them. Thare is no reason to do this prior to the merge, though. I can also take some shots of the bagpipe and chanter. In fact, I think there may be some (of mine) over at Wikimedia commons (category:Highland games). Feel free to copy this note over to the discussion pages of the articles if you want. JFPerry 18:00, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure which should be merged into which, but it's kind of clear that they're about more or less the thing... and for what it's worth, your 95% is better. The chanter taken separately is a practice chanter, but as part of the pipes it isn't much different to the drones etc, which don't have their own article. --MacRusgail 18:05, 6 April 2006 (UTC) p.s. I have created Category:Bagpiping today, and also worked on canntaireachd some more, if you're interested.[reply]
Actually, what you just said here got me to thinking, because, really, the practice chanter and the bagpipe chanter are not the same thing at all. The practice chanter is a musical instrument in its own right and is played as such. The bagpipe chanter is not an instrument in its own right. Although it can be blown or sounded (or even played, for that matter) separately from the bagpipes, fundamentally it is a part of the bagpipes, like the drone pipes, and not a separate instrument. It has no top piece. To play it separately, you insert the strock (and reed) into your mouth and blow on it. This is a really yucky experience and is generally done only to test a reed or some similar purpose.
So my second-thoughts is that chanter (being a part of the bagpipes) should be merged into bagpipes, and practice chanter should be left as a separate article based on the fact that it is, or can be, and often is played as, a separate instrument in its own right. JFPerry 14:27, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Parochial vs Rural

Hi!

This is in relation the 'is doric stronger in _parochial_ or _rural_ parts' editing on the Inverurie page.

Whilst I agree that adjective 'parochial' may be construed as as offensive, it is not correct to say that rural areas have a stronger doric culture- indeed the smaller Aberdeenshire villages often have the most immigration from other parts of the UK (if this all sounds a bit settler-watch/neo-nazi, trust me, it is not meant to) and hence the mildest dialects, whilst the larger towns such as Banff, Fraserburgh and Peterhead, are the places where Doric thrives the most.

So- what is better way of saying parochial in this context? I was thinking perhaps 'insular', 'isolated' or perhaps a fluffy term such as 'far-flung'. What are your thoughts? Fergie 12:05, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point. However, larger towns with middle class populations/commuter belts, tend in my experience to speak something closer to RP. This is because the further up the social scale you tend to go in Scotland, the more anglicised people are, with the aristocracy usually having little to mark them out as Scottish other than their property, and some token sentiment. However, I think TV has probably caused more anglicisation/standardisation of speech, whether English dialects, Welsh, or Doric, in the last 30 or so years. But in general, I tend to find, that the larger the town, the more watered down the local accent is - including working class folk. --MacRusgail 17:44, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I attempted the beginnings of a rewrite on this one, as it was a mess of bs when I found it the other day. I left some of the dodgy bits in, so as not to totally eviscerate what was there and start an edit war. I guess I was not bold enough. I would appreciate your input or help on what to take out or rewrite. Do you think it's worth going through and citing the bits I have sources for (McNeill et al), and deleting all the unsourced stuff, or do you think we should completely start over with it? Beannachd Leibh, --Kathryn NicDhàna 18:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A bhana-charaid, as usual it's really hard to separate the bs from the real stuff. I think that the Encyclopedia Mythica seems to have a lot to answer for. I would trust McNeill over some of the really dubious stuff in there. All the best, --MacRusgail 18:26, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've got Gearóid Ó Crualaoich's The Book of the Cailleach (2003, Cork University Press) here, as well The Gaelic Otherworld - Ronald Black's (2005, Birlinn, Edinburgh) extensive edit and annotations of J.G. Campbell's Superstitions in the Highlands and Islands of Scotland and Witchcraft and the Second Sight in the Highlands and Islands. Not sure how soon I'll get to it, but maybe after I've finished reading these I can take another stab at the page, and dump anything that can't be sourced. IIRC, all the bits I added (from memory) are from McNeill, but I have no idea where some of the stuff previous editors included is from. I suspect some (most? all?) of those things will not be sourceable... or, at least not in reliable sources. Tapadh Leibh for your input, --Kathryn NicDhàna 00:58, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Mopeds and Mod Culture

Hello there,

I do a bit of editing on the moped article, and I just read your recent edit where you noted:

Mopeds were popular with Mods in England, and the Mod Revival.

I'm definitely no expert on Mod culture, but I wonder if you didn't mean scooters instead? As I understood it, mopeds had little popularity in the UK other than some early autocycles manufactured there. --Charleschuck 04:53, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I always tend to think of a scooter as one of those things that children push along the road. I thought mopeds were more or less the same thing, and one was a kind of the other. --MacRusgail 14:01, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose the similarity is that, in many jurisdictions, any small motor driven cycle can be classified legally as a moped—including some scooters. Only very small scooters, however, fall within the legal definition. Physically, in general, mopeds almost always have pedals, and rarely have leg shields and never floorboards, whereas scooters never have pedals, and almost always have leg shields and always floorboards. --Charleschuck 16:41, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion

Hello! I noticed that you have been a contributor to articles on Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion. You may be interested in checking out a new WikiProject - WikiProject Anglicanism. Please consider signing up and participating in this collaborative effort to improve and expand Anglican-related articles! Cheers! Fishhead64 22:51, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lavellan

Thought you might be interested to know that Fortean Times (issue #211) recently had brief article on the lavellan and used the Wikipedia article as its source, calling it a "short but tantalisingly intriguing entry on a truly obscure cryptid". Always nice to have good press. --Joelmills 03:31, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]