User talk:82.40.19.192: Difference between revisions

Scottish Musicians

When an article states that someone is from Scotland, the implication is that they are Scottish, unless it states otherwise. Editing such articles to say that they are "Scottish...from Scotland" is redundant and makes the sentence clumsy, hence my edits. You have now changed tack by removing information about the town and nation (Scotland) that they are from and thus impoverished the articles. For instance the article on KT Tunstall no longer mentions in the main text that she is from St. Andrews, that on Amy Macdonald that she is from Glasgow, that The Fratellis are from Glasgow or that Paolo Nutini is from Paisley.

Also in the Rod Stewart article the opening paragraph says that he "is a Scottish singer...He describes himself as a Scottish rock singer...He considers himself as a true Scot" all in immediate succession. Although there are nuances of the meanings of these three statements, they surely are better and more elegantly encapsulated in one phrase. Yours aye, Mutt Lunker 22:03, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I have done this because people, particularly from the United States, are very insular and believe that anything that comes out of the United Kingdom is English. That is why famous Scots like Andy Murray are referred to as "English", regardless of where they come from. Unless it is stated explicitly that they are Scottish, people from Scotland will continue to be referred to as "English".

The Arctic Monkeys are referred to as an "English band", as are many others, so that same rule should apply to the Scots. I agree the whole "Scottish... from Scotland" part was a bit redundant, so removed it. I think it is more important to state their nationality, given that the specifics are at the very least mentioned in the infobox, and oftentimes later in the article.

I am not messing with the facts here. The people to whom you refer are in fact Scottish. I merely clarified that fact, as I do not give the rest of the world as much credit as you do. Why? Because you do not see thinkers, athletes and artists from your country incessantly misrepresented (just noticed that you come from Scotland, so feel free to disregard that last statement).

If you want to seek out a compromise, so be it. I do want it stated that they are "Scottish", however. Hell, we have already had Alexander Graham Bell taken from us in the eyes of Wikipedia readers. I had a similar debate with another user who insisted that Bell be referred to as an "American who was born, raised and educated in Scotland by Scottish parents".

Clydey (keep forgetting to log in)

Agreed regarding plain wrong assertions that e.g. someone Scottish is English. However, to someone who thinks that Scotland is part of England, additionally saying that they're Scottish doesn't make things any clearer as it follows they're also likely to just think that Scottish is a sub-set of English. You can't force the knowledge on people without the risk of making articles cumbersome and didactic, but they do have the option of clicking on the link to Scotland or Scottish to enlighten themselves. One can hope but it is their choice. Believe me I'm under no illusions as to the level of confusion about Scotland as I work in England and overseas a lot. Aye, Mutt Lunker 00:34, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm inclined to think that stating explicitly that they are Scottish is clearer. For example, it says that Alexander Graham Bell was born and raised in Scotland, yet it then goes on to say that he moved to Canada, then America, eventually gaining citizenship. Rather than stating that he is Scottish, it leaves it up to the reader to decide. It pisses me off probably more than it should that Canada and America lay claim to a man who is Scottish to any reasonable person.

I think people like Paolo Nutini should be referred to as Scottish, as he has very little Italian in him despite his name (born in Scotland to Scottish father and mother, father's family having been here for 4 generations); however, in the article it states his place of birth and then immediately refers to his Italian ancestry as though of equal importance.

I think we should seek consistency, and if English subjects are being referred to as "English", so Scottish folk should be referred to as "Scottish". It might seem pedantic, but I feel very strongly about eradicating the misconception that Scottish people are to England as New Yorkers are to America.

...and for the reasons I've stated above, what you are doing doesn't aid this aim. I don't think it is wrong to state that someone is Scottish but not if it's done intrusively and as part of an agenda.

To look at it from the opposite perspective, from your example, if someone was in the belief that New York was a nation, whether you say that a native is "a New Yorker" or "from New York" doesn't dispel this misapprehension.

Unless you start saying "X is Scottish (which by the way isn't English)" you won't achieve your aim. Obviously this would be inappropriate, not to say daft.

With Bell, as his situation in regard to nationality is complex I think the phrasing you cite as an example explains it perfectly. The article may leave it up to the reader to decide but who is anyone else to decide for the reader in such a situation, without good reason, and citations? Bell himself chose to take out American citizenship so for someone else to assert that he is Scottish without a citation showing that's how he regarded himself is not accurate. The opposite also applies though.

Assigning nationality to someone on the basis of wanting to claim them or otherwise is very dangerous. Do you decide if Tony Blair is Scottish on the basis of whether you like him and want to claim him as such.

Place of birth is only one factor. Was Saki or Nick Drake Burmese? Mutt Lunker 01:53, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I think stating nationality is clearer than stating their birthplace. You give people way too much credit. I know what you are saying and I take your point, but it does not hurt to be clear. Andy Murray has stated quite emphatically that he is Scottish, yet he is still oftentimes referred to as "English".

You actually countered your own point when you said that place of birth is only one factor. Many people have been born in Scotland, yet they do not consider themselves Scottish, for one reason or another, such as parentage. Rod Stewart is a good example of someone who does not recognise his country of birth as his nationality. For that reason I have accepted Mark Knopfler's introduction as a "British" musician, despite him being born in Scotland. I am not a hypocrite

Even if you disagree with all of the above, there is still the issue of consistency. English people are referred to as English, yet Scots are not afforded that same courtesy. Why? Successful Scots are British, whereas unsuccessful Scots are Scottish. Someone wanted Billy Connolly to be referred to as Irish-Scots. It borders on the ridiculous.

On the issue of Alexander Graham Bell, you are way off the mark. People gain citizenship for a variety of reason, one being that it is beneficial to do so. Do we know the reason he gained citizenship? No. Still, does that supercede someon'es birth, parentage, ancestry, upbringing and education? Bell was born a Scotsman and raised as one. To put citizenship on a par with that is a joke. Would this be an issue if Bell was a infamous mass murderer? I reckon Scotland would get all the credit for that one. He invented the telephone, though, so we have to deal with 2 other countries trying to claim him.

Adam Smith will turn up as a German next week. I think David Hume spent a fortnight in Paris once. I'll get ready for a tug of war with the French over him. I was joking about those last two, by the way :-)

Andy Murray

Hi, thank you for editing Wikipedia! However, please assume good faith on talk pages. Please do not call other user vandals like you did to the Dewarw talk page. If you wish to experiment, use the sandbox. if you continue to abuse other talk pages you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

Please also, read Wikipedia policies before stating so called "policies."

On my talk page you wrote:

"Changing a detail that is sourced, yet does not need to be sourced is vanadalism."

Not only is this statement ambiguous and misleading, it is also incorrect.

Vanadalism is actually spelt like this: vandalism. Please check your spelling, it lowers the work load for other editors in the future as well as creating a better experience for all.

Furthermore, being Scottish automatically makes you British, so the change was not vandalism. In fact, describing someone as British is far better than calling them Scottish, as a Scottish person's home state is the "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland." Within that state, they live in Scotland. The same goes for English and Welsh people.

In the article it mentions that Murray is "proud to be British."

Finally, please sign every statement with you user-name by typing 4x ~.

As I said, thank you for editing Wikipedia and please do not abuse talk pages again.

Thanks, Dewarw 16:09, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I know how to spell vandalism. It was a typo, as you are well aware. Mispelling "vandalism" on a talk page does not increase anyone's workload. If you insist on taking cheapshots, I will gladly reciprocate:

"Finally, please sign every statement with you user-name by typing 4x ~."

It is "your" not "you". There, now we are even.

You said it yourself: "Being Scottish automatically makes you British". By simply referring to him as "British" you are taking advantage of people's ignorance. In America, for example, "Britain" is used interchangeably with "England". I am changing it back because "Scottish" automatically indicates "British". The reverse is not true.

I notice that you did not change Tim Henman to "British", nor did you go around every other personality listed as English and do the same. As far as Andy Murray's national identity is concerned, everyone knows that he consides himself Scottish and his article states as much. Your entire argument is based around one statement made to Gabby Logan. Did you expect him to say, "No, I am not proud to be British, only Scottish".

Given that personalities from the separate nations are consistently reduced to their home nation, you have no cause to go around changing Scottish people to British unless you are willing to do the same for each and every other article, starting with Tim Henman. Now, I apologise if I was a touch over the top with you last night, but I am sick of Scottish people being referred to as British only when it suits England. 82.40.19.192 17:06, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I am English, but I prefer being known as British. I fully support the change of articles from Welsh, Scottish and English to British. Unfortunately there are too many people to change and while I have changed a few in the past, it is an impossible task. Other times (such as on A murray's people revert my edits)

I would gladly take some support for these changes. I have already done Andy Murray and Tim Henman.

I also went over the top when I replied to your comment with the spelling mistake, and I therefore apologise.

Please be nice, assume good faith and do not start edit wars.

Remember, I am fully in favour of Welsh, Scottish and English to British.

Regards, Dewarw 18:15, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Andy Murray, you will be blocked from editing.