Talk:Glasgow/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Glasgow. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Featured article

I proposed this article as a featured article Wikipedia:Featured article candidates as I thought it was a very balanced view of a complex society and explores subjects that most "city" articles do not. The outcome has been the removal of two images for possible copyvios and comments that indicate that there is a bit of work to do. The comments have been constructive and we need a map of the city, a better history section and the restoration of the coat of arms from a public domain source. Any volunteers to fill the gaps? Tiles 08:05, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)

It would be good to get this as a featured article, but it does need a lot of work. On my part I can fill in more sections every now and again, but it might take some time. I am interested in filling in the history of Glasgow, but it might need a new page for a full history. Master Of Ninja 07:28, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Finished the history section so it is more or less complete. Obviously it could do with more expanding and maybe being moved to a page of its own eventually, but it it good as a basic history overview as for now. Hopefully this will help to be a feature article then. Master Of Ninja 06:44, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Meaning of 'Glasgow'

I believe it's wrong to mention 'Glasgu', meaning 'dear green place'. This is incorrect, and comes from a Daniel DeFoe quotation describing the city. I have no sources for this but will try to find some, as I distinctly remember being taught this at university. The correct derivation is 'Glaschu', as mentioned. I've changed this on the page with a 'citation needed' label. -- Emma, 20:31, 27 May 2009 (GMT) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.192.215.180 (talk)

Districts

This section needs a few adjustments and additions. BBC Scotland's Headquarters are no longer in the West End, and the SECC being classed in the West End as it is described isn't correct. Perhaps an addition of the fast improving waterfront regeneration from the city centre towards the west would now merit a section of it's own, which could include both the BBC's new place on the south bank and the SECC on the north. User:mickm 03:13, Jul 27, 2007 (UTC)

poverty

The second addition, about the "unionist" labour party control is strictly accurate, but is phrased and placed in such a way as to appear bigoted to a reader familiar with the city and comes across as politicised. Accordingly, I've moved it to a lesser position and rewritten the phrasing. Darkaddress 03:42, Jul 2, 2004 (UTC)

motto

The article says: The motto of the city is "Let Glasgow Flourish" and this is part of the arms. Glasgow is a cathedral city, and I believe that its full motto is: Let Glasgow flourish, by the preaching of His Word, and the praising of His Name. It is true that the motto is often abbreviated as described, but I'm not sure what the official status of the abbreviation is. Bovlb 18:23, 2004 Mar 4 (UTC)

"Let Glasgow Flourish" Is the section of the full text which sometimes appears on the coat of arms. It was the advertising slogan used for the city after the Garden Festival and the City of Culture Status, and whether it only appeared on the coat of arms at this time, I can't say. It is indeed abbreviated from the full motto, for two reasons. First, to become non-denominational. Second to advertise Glasgow, rather than advertise God. Today, most Glaswegians would not know the full motto, and for better or worse, the abbreviated version has become accepted. Superbo 05:10, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Just to clarify, the full motto of Glasgow is "Let Glasgow Flourish". This is not an abbreviation, but is an excerp from a motto "Let Glasgow Flourish by the preaching of His Word..." by St. Mungo. Regards, User:Anthony_cfc 15:02, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Quite so: "Let Glasgow Flourish" is the motto matriculated with Lord Lyon in 1866, 1975, 1996. Mottoes form an integral part of the coat of arms under Scottish laws of arms, and can't be changed at will. The city council would have apply to Lyon to change it. Lozleader 17:32, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

grid

Does anybody know what the city is build with a grid road system? Edward 23:10, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Sorry. I don't understand the question. Tiles 07:43, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

The article says "The grid-like layout of the city centre makes it relatively car friendly, despite the numerous and confusing one-way systems." and it is correct, the centre is built like an American city. I'm just wondering when it was built and why it was built like this. I think other readers would be interested as well. Edward 11:15, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Hope this helps, I've added a bit on it. Maccoinnich 18:17, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)

Yes, very helpful Thank you. Also nice to learn about, drumlins, a term that is new to me. Edward 19:16, 2005 Feb 4 (UTC)

Yes the centre is built like an American City -- but according to my University's history teacher: Glasgow was the first ever city to use he grid system. Many American cities have copied this idea. The most famous would be New York City.

yes that would ring true as there are no 900 year old cities in America

chambers

Is it "City Hall" or City Chambers? Tiles 01:00, 12 May 2004 (UTC)

Yep, it's chambers. I fix that. See how many more of my inadvertent americanisms you can spot :) -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 01:11, 12 May 2004 (UTC)

Glasgow has in fact a City Hall as well - but Glasgow's City Hall is a concert venue, and soon to be the new home of the BBC Scottish Symphony Orchastra (though I've not yet added that page yet!)

Glasgow City Halls has now been added. Resistme 23:12, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

population

The weird thing is I can find sources for both the 629,501 and the 577,869 figures. However the majority use the 577,869 figure.

Google search for glasgow+629,501+"2001 census" with 5 results
Google search for glasgow+577,869+"2001 census" with 589 results

AlistairMcMillan 15:32, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Indeed, the majoritarian figure is quoted by lots of reliable sources (and some wikipedia mirrors). This page at the UK's National Statistics agency gives 662853 (or 653716 in households) for "City of Glasgow". Maybe the numerous figures arise from differing definitions of what "Glasgow" is. 81.154.240.19 16:16, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Population

I've added the clarification of the varying different populations of Glasgow, of which, from the 2001 census are 4! Glasgow city council boundary is 577,669 (but since the city boundaries were changed in 1995 with the loss of Rutherglen and other areas, for comparisions, the larger population or 'locality of Glasgow' is 629,501 and relates to the former boundaries (ie Glasgow has outgrown the City Boundaries!). The census also has populations for Greater Glasgow Health Board area and the Settlement of Glasgow, which is effectively Greater Glasgow population, 1,1million. Definiations and references are included for clarification. see also Geography of Glasgow a new section I've also added.

[ENTRY]

Due to council boundary changes since the last census in 1991, Glasgow has three distinct definations for the population of Glasgow in the 2001 Census: the smallest is the new Glasgow City Council Area^[1] (which lost the district of Rutherglen to North Lanarkshire Cuncil, the City of Glasgow Locality Area^[2] (formerly Glasgow District Council Area) and the Greater Glasgow Metropolitan Settlement Area^[3] (including surrounding localities).

Location	Population	Hectares	Density/hectare	Sq Miles	Density/Sq Mile
Glasgow City Council	577,869	17,549	32.93	67.75	8,528
City Of Glasgow	629,501	16,210	38.83	62.58	10,058
Greater Glasgow Area	1,168,270	36,846	31.71	142.26	8,212

Source 2001 Census

^ The offical population of Glasgow City Council unitary authority.
^ The City of Glasgow locality, as defined by the [2001 Census]. Localities are sub-divisions of 2001 Settlements that are based on 1991 Locality boundaries.
^ The Greater Glasgow Settlement Area or Metropolitian Area was created from groups of neighbouring urban postcodes grouped so that each group of postcode unit contains at least a given number of addresses per hectare and the group contains at least 500 residents and includes the following localities: Airdrie, Bargeddie, Barrhead, Bellshill, Bishopbriggs, Bothwell, Busby, Calderbank, Carfin, Chapelhall, Clarkston, Clydebank Coatbridge, Duntocher and Hardgate, Elderslie, Faifley, Giffnock, Glasgow, Holytown, Howwood, Johnstone, Kilbarchan, Linwood, Milngavie, Milton, Motherwell, New Stevenston, Newarthill, Newmains, Newton Mearns, Old Kilpatrick, Paisley, Renfrew, Stepps, Uddingston Viewpark and Wishaw.

[END]

Resistme 23:20, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

I have written to and also contacted by telephone, Glasgow City Council Population and Statistics department. They kindly provided me with a population fact sheet for The City of Glasgow and Clyde Valley Conurbation.

Glasgow city council confirms Glasgow's population in 2006 had 580,690.

The pdf document below confirms that the City is located at the centre of the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Conurbation, which has an urban population of 1,750,000. The surrounding region of Strathclyde, which includes Ayrshire, Argyll and Lanarkshire has a population of 2.3 million.

The .pdf file provided by the Population and Statistics department is below.

http://www.glasgow.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/E3BE21DA-4D84-4CC4-9C02-2E526FDD9169/0/populationaug07.pdf Glasgowfinder (talk) 18:47, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I see user AlisonW has at a stroke added over a million to the population of Glasgow. We now have the "Conurbation Population" in the infobox, instead of the "Urban Population" we previously had. 1,171,390 to 2,331,000 is an impressive rate of growth. As she explained, she synthesised the figure from this online source she found. Now I have no problem with the city of my birth gaining all these extra people, but it seems a little like original research to me. From a look at other cities, I can't see any other city which quotes its population this way in the infobox. London, for example, quotes "Urban 8,278,251 Metro 12-14 million". From a look at the source she has used it seems she has added "580,690" (for the city) to "around 1,750,000" (for Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Conurbation), to arrive at this amazing figure. It seems to me that the 580,690 actual Glaswegians have thus been counted twice by her. For this reason I disagree with her when she says "Consensus is fine for grammar, but is hardly relevant to hard facts.". It all depends how 'hard' your facts are, and these look rather soft to me. What do others think? --John (talk) 15:59, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

John i would contest your neutrality towards this subject, if Glasgow city council claim that there is 1,750,000 in their cities conurbation then i think you should take the issue up with them as they where kind enough to provide wiki with facts Glasgowfinder (talk) 13:07, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

1,750,000 is fine. As the conurbation clearly includes the city itself, adding the city's population onto the 1,750,000 to get 2,331,000 is clearly incorrect though; it is a nice illustration of why we have rules like WP:NOR. By this logic you could synthesise that, as the population of London is "8,278,251", and its conurbation is "12-14 million", the "total" would be, what, about 20 million? --John (talk) 16:25, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

This is a joke. You cannot use wikipedia as an accurate population source at all- as if Glasgow is bigger than Leeds and Liverpool!? Ridiculous. Time for people to start using reliable sources for once. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.209.243.3 (talk) 21:01, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

info table

How about a table with all the stats for Glasgow? Columbia University is a good template. Mat334 06:47, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

weegies, etc

Does anyone agree that the comments on weegies, teuchters etc are undeserving of their current prominent position in the opening paragraph, and would be better served being moved to the People section? AndrewMcQ 13:34, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I'll second that. Could be under People, or Dialect. Berek 13:54, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I'll third it. AlistairMcMillan 15:08, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

- T'is done. AndrewMcQ 18:38, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

History of Glasgow

Is there anyone who can edit and expand the history of glasgow, maybe to the point where we can fill another specialist page on it, with a summary on the Glasgow page? This would help get it to a state where we can probably re-submit it for features article status - Master Of Ninja 21:44, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Page needs cutting down

The wikipedia editor is indicating that the size of the article now is a bit large for the page, and needs cutting down. Any suggestions on how to go about this? - Master Of Ninja 21:16, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

"The city's industries became uncompetitive, leading to high unemployment, urban decay and poor health for the city's inhabitants." Shouldn't that read "had the industrial heart ripped out of it by industrial regulation imposed by a government with no local support", can we have this offensive Tory rubbish removed--- Richard

Crime with a capital C

Other areas of the city have faired less well however. Extreme social decay blights the east end of the city , areas such as Carlton, Brigeton, Parkhead and Shettleston have high levels of unemployment, households where the main income is from disability payments, Crime , achololism and drug abuse. On average there is one murder per week committed in the east end of glasgow (in 2002 40 for the whole of Glasgow [4]) as the sectarian gangs, the youth gangs or the crime / drug gangs fight it out for control of territory or business.

The east end is undergoing gradual regeneration as large sections of sandstone tenaments mostly rented from the various non profit housing associations or industrial areas are levelelled and replaced by modern private housing. This forces the poor from the area and effectively moves them to new suburban slums on the outskirts of the city, allowing the first waves of the upwardly mobile to begin moving in.

I just removed these two paragraphs from the article. If we are going to stick this kind of thing in, we are going to need a source. AlistairMcMillan 05:01, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

"Third biggest tourist destination"

We read that Glasgow is the third biggest tourist destination in the U.K after London and Edinburgh. I suspect that this depends considerably on what you mean by tourism (does it include so-called "business tourism"?) and "destination"? Anyway, is there any source for this? Meanwhile, I'm replacing the claim with a rather less grand one backed by statistics from www.staruk.org.uk. -- Hoary 05:07, 2005 May 24 (UTC)

here's some fact's Hoary, for a guy whoes never been to Glasgow you are very quick to judge but here you go. wise up.......

www.lonelyplanet.com/destinations/europe/glasgow/ www.eurolines.com/cityinfo/info/glasgow/ (Lonely Planet) www.bbc.co.uk/capitalofculture/background.shtml (British Broadcasting corparation) www.world66.com/europe/unitedkingdom/scotland/glasgow www.affordabletravel.org/ europe/unitedkingdom/scotland/glasgow www.seeglasgow.com/media-office/ features/history/city-of-reinvention www.thebigchoice.com/University_ Guide/glasgow_university.html

Unfortunetly you cannot edit any of those web pages with false information

Where are you facts and proof about Birmingham and manchester? As A british person i know for a fact that York, Brighton and Blackpool have a bigger influx of tourists per year.

No, Babyoil, I'm very cautious in judging. I presented the precise URL for a web page produced by a respected and disinterested organization, one with no reason to push Birmingham or Manchester at the expense of Glasgow, or vice versa. I've said above that this is unsatisfactory. Meanwhile, what does "visit" mean? (I don't suppose that it includes commuting, but it's such a vague term that it doesn't exclude it.) You've given half a dozen or more URLs -- incompletely; all you need do is write them [http://stunning_url.com/ like this] -- but the names of all of them suggest that the sponsoring organizations have reason to boost Glasgow. I'm not going to go through all of them: which one do you think is the most authoritative?

How does the new version strike you stylistically? (Again: Today Glasgow is the third most visited city in Britain, and a major cultural centre, after London and Edinburgh. With 13 million tourists flocking to city each year, a revision of In 2003 it was the fifth in a list of towns most visited by foreign residents, after London, Edinburgh, Manchester and Birmingham.) There are two quasi-sentences, but only one of them has a finite verb. Maybe there's a difference between Glaswegian English and my own English (and maybe mine is non-native), but that seems odd to me. Also, I don't say "flocking to city"; instead, "flocking to the city" or similar. -- Hoary 02:23, 2005 May 25 (UTC)

Glasgow has now overtaken Edinburgh as the UK’s second main tourist destination.

It most certainly hasn't.

Does time run backwards in Glasgow?

Just one result of Babyoil's latest series of "improvements": This was actually Daniel Defoe's description of the city when he visited in the early 18th century. He also claimed that Glasgow was the prettiest little town he had ever seen, at that time the, before the great fire of 1652, the city was built up with pretty little carved and sculptured buildings, none remain. So "the early 18th century" came "before the great fire of 1652". This is amazing stuff. -- Hoary 02:38, 2005 May 25 (UTC)

i misread that and and have edted it now i wrote that at 6am so what can i say.

Glasgow as confectionery

We read: At that time, before many major fires altered building laws, the city was built up with pretty little wooden hand carved and sculptured buildings. Wood aside, that sounds like something in the shop window of a classy confectioner. I can make wild guesses about what the writer intended, but don't know. Can somebody with access to authoritative works on Glasgow's history elaborate? -- Hoary 03:56, 2005 May 26 (UTC)

It's basically accurate, albeit worded in slightly flowery language. Check out [5] . These are lecture slides from my History of Architecture course at university. After the fire, building facades at least were required to made of stone. Check out [6]. None of these buildings now survive. Maccoinnich 11:59, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

Hmm, those in your picture appear to be three-storey, which hardly sounds "little". "Low-ceilinged" sounded a bit pejorative; I settled for compact (as in "no space wasted"). I wildly guess that the carving was of ornamentation on the pilasters (cf Ludlow or indeed Stratford); as I don't know, I've cut mention of this. Could you or somebody else who's knowledgable please fix this? -- Hoary 13:39, 2005 May 26 (UTC)

Rhyming slang

I have to say, I've lived in Glasgow for 20 years and have never heard any rhyming slang that wasn't somewhat ironically used and/or derived from Cockney rhyming slang. I also have never heard either of the two examples given. Am I just inobservant or is this article overstating the presence of any Glaswegian rhyming slang? --Jamieli 16:32, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'm Glasgow born and bred and share your thoughts - happy to see this removed --Doc (?) 01:17, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Me too and I have removed the slang to here in case somebody can make a case for it:

"Glasgow also has its own rhyming slang. Examples:

"china" = china plate = mate "Mother McCree" = tea

I've also removed: Certain features of the East Coast (Edinburgh and Fife) dialect are sometimes confused with Glaswegian. "Cannae'" for "can't" and "dinnae" for "don't", for example, are East Coast and not Glaswegian. Similarly, only East Coasters say "ken" for "know".

"ken" is not just an East Coast expression, at least not it usage. It make have originated in the east coast, but used, all the way down the west coast to Dumfries. Resistme 23:37, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm sure the confusion arises from too much reading of The Broons and Oor Wullie Tiles 08:02, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Canny, cannie, canny, The traditional Scots spelling was canna, pronounced differently in various places, much as English is spelled traditionaly in one way but pronounced differently in diffent places.

Could add the pronunciation in IPA but do we realy want to dignify the proletarian patois with such like?

Schemey

Dialect wars

I've noticed a number of changes/reverts/changes again etc. in the dialect section. Personally, I would go with the spelling in a Scots dictionary but someone shot me down for that saying that Glaswegian dialect can't be taken from a Scots dictionary. Personally I think that's a lot of rubbish, but I will defer to a qualified linguist who can argue otherwise. As far as I can see, while the exact pronounciation may be different in Glasgow the spelling doesn't change. To me canny==skillful/careful and cannae==cannot - i.e. they are homonyms (One of two or more words that have the same sound and often the same spelling but differ in meaning). "canna" is to me a local contraction of cannae (so may be "canna'" is more correct) --Colin Angus Mackay 07:32, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Nothing to do with a qualified linguist but attitude. Do you give Scots some respect and recognise the traditional cannon of literature and the (somewhat fluid) spelling conventions or treat it as the utterings of the illiterate an simply write it phonetically based on perceived sound to letter correspondences of 'Standard' English?

Cannae is a more modern written form of the traditional canna meaning can't, na being the negative particle in Scots, pronounced variously from place to place. Canny or cannie is the other word, y, sometimes ie the adjective suffix, ie is also used to make diminutives like grannie so ya canny shove a canny granny aff the bus could be ye canna shove a canny grannie aff the bus. Unfortunately those who canna spell aren't very canny and never listened to their grannie. Then again there is a school of thought that thinks Scots has no rules and people should write how they please in order to get the authentic voice over. Interestingly none of these people seem to advocate the same when writing English though its plain to anyone with a pair of lugs that English is pronounced variously from place to place and we're all missing out on the authentic voice.

Heidbanger 17.06.05

I hope you don't mind but I indented your response to make it easier to read.

I think that Scots deserves the respect of a full language, I know some would like to relegate it to the status of a dialect of English. As such there are grammatical rules and spelling rules and the pronounciation from place-to-place is neither-here-nor-there. In many languages such as English or Spanish there are different pronounciations. In some locales the word "Drawing" is pronounced "Drorring". In some regions of Spain the final "s" in words is dropped - "El Corte Inglés" (the name of a department store) in Andalucia is pronounced "El Corte Inglé". Also the "ce", "ci" and "z" in Madrid are pronounced "the", "thi" and "th" (soft "th" like in "think") while in many other spanish speaking areas they are pronounced "se", "si" and "ss". They don't change the spelling based on the regional pronounciation. So pronounciation variants are not just something that happens in the English language - they can also happen in Scots.

If it is attitude then mine is to take the spelling from a Scots dictionary rather than, as you've said, "simply write it phonetically based on perceived sound to letter correspondences of 'Standard' English"

--Colin Angus Mackay 19:19, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

As a member of the illiterate proletariat, I have learned more from the above exchange about Scots as a language than I ever did within the Scottish education system in the 1960s. So thank you for that. Given my ignorance of the subject, I feel bound to revert my revert and leave the field to the experts. However, it would be useful to have a brief explanation of the final decision included within the section - something along the lines of "While Glaswegian may sound like a corruption of the English language it is actually a variant of the Scots language with its own distinctive pronunciation..." Tiles 04:48, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The article does say "The Glasgow Patter is a brand of local humorous Scots dialect" Not exactly scientific but the same kind of thing.

Wee MacGreegor 20.06.05

glasgow metro 'the only dedicated underground metro system in the UK'

having lived in newcastle-upon-tyne for 14 years, i'd argue with this....

also, the london tube isn't a dedicated underground system as a lot of the lines run overground outside the centre.

Well you've basically proved your point. Glasgow's underground is completely underground - London's isn't and Newcastle's "version" isn't either

What does dedicated mean here, exactly? Are you saying it means 'completely underground' because that's not clear. Why not just say glasgow metro 'the only completely underground metro system in the UK'. I think that's unmabiguous and won't step on Newcastle/London's toes. 86.133.219.224 09:08, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

I didn't want to edit it in case I was wrong, but itsn't CineWorld, Europe's tallest Cinema Complex and not the World's. I'm sure I read that on the plaque that's in there. Barry

The plague said it was the tallest cinema in the world - see [7] Resistme 23:46, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Yeah cineworld does have a world record. edit it, be bold. Em the Glasgow Subway ceased to be completley underground after its renovation in the 60s/70s the depot is overground. There is now points on the line, until then they lifted the trains on&off the track with a crane. --81.156.4.12 00:30, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Now, come on! Yes, the depot is overground but the passengers don't go into the depot, do they? (LW).

Politics

Why are 12 MSPs listed in the info box? I believe there are 10 constituency MSPs elected by the Glasgow elctoral region of the Scottish Parliament, and 7 additional member MSPs, making a total of 17. Laurel Bush 17:59, 18 November 2005 (UTC).

I am genuinely puzzled by the latest change by Vclaw. Surely the city is synonymous with the council area? To those who might argue that the city has not always had the present council area boundaries I would reply that any attempt to define the city any other way effectively means going back to the boundaries some local authority area had at some point in the past, and the local authority only achieved roughly its present borders about 100 years ago. Unless someone can clarify I propose to revert. PatGallacher 01:03, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, I think Vclaw's made the right decision. I'd never really thought to apply that template to the Scottish cities (and I made the template at first), but it is more logical. We (rightly) have separate articles for Glasgow (describing the city) and City of Glasgow (very tightly describing the local authority area), and it makes more sense on the Glasgow page to have a box that says that it's in City of Glasgow, traditionally has been in Lanarkshire, lists the UK and Scottish parliament seats that cover it. There's no going back in time, as the population is the population that's in the current boundaries, and doesn't list anywhere else as being in Glasgow. Maccoinnich 01:17, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

This article is about the city, so I think the Scotland place infobox makes more sense are it provides more useful information about the city i.e. the grid reference, postcode, traditional county etc. Whereas if you want more details on the council, the seperate City of Glasgow page has the council area infobox with details of the politics etc. Also the council area is defined with known boundaries, whereas 'Glasgow' is less well defined. As the demographics section says, 'Glasgow' can refer to a variety of different areas, and the census defined Glasgow (locality) differently to the Glasgow City Council area. Vclaw 03:20, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

QE2 built in Clydebank

It says here the QE2 was built in Glasgow - looking at the history, I see this has come up before - the QE2 was built in Clydebank, which is just outside Glasgow. (I should know, as I'm from Clydebank, and one of my earliest memories is seeing the QE2 being launched). Camillus^{talk|contribs} 15:19, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Actually, all the others mentioned where built in Clydebank: Queen Mary, Queen Elizabeth, and the Royal Yacht Britannia.

Camillus

^{talk|contribs} 15:23, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Lets face fact here, if Glasgow had a real boundary and not one that is basically just the city centre then Clydebank would be official in Glasgow.

Clydebank and Glasgow are two ship building cities on the river clyde. Its is ashame to put down the history of clydebank as it has a remarkeable history for such a small town. However, Glasgow is the nucleus of the urban area and is only the name for everything inside the area it doesnt change anything about the ships distinct origin and history. It means that these ships where built in the glasgow area in the town of Clydebank. Internationally these ships where Built in Glasgow and within Scotland and the U.K, everyone from the Queen to the guy in the pub knows they are built in a town called Clydebank. Clydebank which unfortunetly for its great shipbuilding history is included in the Glasgow metropolitan area if it is looked at on a map and in particular for foreign people. for example Girona is located 30 miles from Barcelona but still included in the barcelona area because it is an international city. And Glasgow is known internationally and in general not clydebank, neighther are the many towns and villages around the glasgow area. If the population of these towns where to trace there routes back they would find that the majority of the older people of there family where moved there from glasgow due to the dispersion of the population of glasogw due to over crowdedness within the city. So in turn the Towns and villages of Glasgow conurbation are populated with ex Glaswegians. For example when Irish or Italian people move to other parts of the world. there grandchildren would Say they are of Irish or Italian decent. the people in this area of Glaswegian decents because before 1950 some of the towns in the glasgow area did not even exist or where very sparsly populated untill the flood of glaswegians, (UTC)Clydebankstud86--(UTC) 18:50, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Nothing about the Gorbles?

My dad was from there. I've read that it was one of the worst slums in Europe. When we visited in the 70s the Gorbles had been torn down for public housing, which I gather has since been torn down yet AGAIN. I'd be fsacinated to see info on this, please. Shawn, Montreal, Jan. 18/06.

You mean the Gorbals. There's a whole article on it already. -- Derek Ross | Talk 06:09, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Clockwork Orange?

I wonder whether the "Clockwork Orange" comment about the Underground ought to be removed. Speaking as a Glaswegian, I've never once heard the Underground referred to as the "Clockwork Orange" outside of Wikipedia. Perhaps some other Glaswegians could say whther they've heard this actually used by locals? Reveilled 12:57, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Speaking as a Glaswegian, I've known the underground as the Clockwork Orange for 25 years. I don't know, but maybe you're young, Reveilled? Also, based on your comment on the Glasgow patter page about "nipping" meaning "french-kissing", I guess we may be talking a generation gap? Camillus (talk) 13:14, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Google for "Clockwork Orange" Glasgow Underground gets 14,400 hits, many on official Glasgow sites, or sites set up by Glaswegians. However, answers.com does mention that most Glaswegians refer to it as the Subway or Tube, which is also true. So maybe the article could be changed to say that some Glaswegians refer to the Subway as the "Clockwork Orange", but usually call it the Subway, Underground, or Tube? Camillus (talk) 13:23, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

You sure you're a Glaswegian ? How could you not know that it was called the "Clockwork Orange" ? I thought all Scots knew that; not just Glaswegians. -- Derek Ross | Talk 23:46, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Maybe he was meaning it is not in general usage? I have never heard a weegie call it "Clockwork Orange", more likely the underground. Panthro 18:59, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, there's truth in that too, as I said above. While I would imagine that a lot of Glaswegians probably know that the "Clockwork Orange" is a nickname for the underground, it's not normally used in "common parlance". And please - don't describe us as "weegies" - we don't like it... Camillus (talk) 20:27, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Well I am one and don't mind it. Panthro 00:05, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

"Clockwork Orange" is definitely not what young people call it these days, most will stick to 'tube' in my experience. But I have heard the term often. Superbo 05:22, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

'Clockwork Orange' was only ever widely used by journalists and suchlike. Most ordinary Glaswegians - including me - have always called it the 'subway', the original name to which it's now reverted. 'Underground' is also fairly common but 'tube' much less so, that being mainly reserved for the London Underground.--RDT2 18:01, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Totally agree with RDT2 - "Clockwork Orange" really isn't used by anyone except journalists and visiting travel writers/broadcasters. It's just a patronising, lazy label handed down from "on high" - like the "Squinty Bridge" which was christened thus solely by Herald journalists and BBC Scotland. People say "underground" or "tube" - no one says "clockwork orange" outside of the Tom Sheilds Diary in the Herald, and this misnomer really shouldn't be continued on into Wikipedia.

I remember when the underground was re-opened in 1980(? - must check) I once or twice heard the underground referred to as "the Clockwork Orange", but usually in the papers, etc, therefore I would agree this seemed to be a phrase coined by the media. One or two years later no-one outside Cowcaddens would have recognised this phrase as describing the underground, so quickly had it passed from favour. Stef M. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.149.40.207 (talk) 23:39, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I would immediately know what was meant by the "Clockwork Orange". Whether people who were too young to remember it being re-opened would know is another matter! Jack forbes (talk) 23:47, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

M74 Extension

"The new link should also relieve traffic congestion on the M8 at the Kingston Bridge, however the road is currently subject to a number of environmental objections, as it has done since the first proposal in the 1970's."

This claim is highly contentious, and I have not even heard the planners of the motorway link make it. The new extension is another feeder that directs traffic onto the Kingston Bridge, not an alternative to it, and as such common sense dictates that it will increase traffic and congestion on the bridge. Unless verification can be supplied, this ought to be reworded or removed. Even then, it should be presented as a contested claim made by one party, rather than as a fact. The section also needs more on the protests against the extension; it is massively controversial, as faces opposion on the basis of environmental concerns, community severence and cost.

--Finton Stack

Actually, under the current proposals there will be no access from the M74 completion to the Kingston Bridge, only to the westbound M8 and M77. However, you are quite right to point up the strong opposition to the scheme, and I have edited the section accordingly. ::Supergolden:: 11:38, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Music scene?

Could we list Alex Harvey http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Harvey and unlist Jesus & MAry Chain (who aren't from Glasgow? 86.1.202.120 22:32, 12 March 2006 (UTC) Richard

Added Alex Harvey. Changed the JAMC entry to just Bobby Gillespie, who is from Glasgow (Bellshill, inside the City boundary). Also added the names of his bands for recognition, and to try and make it clear that the rest of the bands' members are not from Glasgow. I know Primal Scream does have more members from Glasgow but they're not so well known and I'm not going to list them individually. Superbo 05:32, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Cheers for that. Another conspiuous abscence occurs to me: http://www.donovan.ie/Life-frame.htm :-)---- Richard

Bellshill has never been regarded as part of Glasgow. The only link seems to be a 2001 census statistical gathering group. As the Greater Glasgow Metropolitan Settlement Area takes in almost half of Scotland's population, you could use this to argue half of Scotland's population comes from Glasgow. ML5 12:33, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Although I owe that Bobby Gillespie a punch in the mouth, and have no reason to defend him, he DID use to stay in Stanmore Road, Mount Florida. I know this as I stayed across the road from him. He loves to tell the media tales of "the wild streets of Glasgow" but the house was in some wee granny scheme full of curtain twitchers, God knows how his maw & da scammed their way into than one as they were probably the only people there under 60 at the time. Stef M. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.149.40.207 (talk) 23:45, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I have started a page on the Burns Howff music pub that used to be in W Regent St. This was the launching pad for many Scottish Groups including Stone the Crows, AWB, and Frankie Miller. I am still compiling information on the subject and have contacted the former owner for more information. A link to this page in the music section would be appreciated.

Rename suggestion for Category:Glaswegians

This is just a heads up that it has been suggested that Category:Glaswegians be renamed Category:People from Glasgow, Scotland. I assume that people with the Glasgow article on their watchlists may have an opinion on this matter. If you wish to contribute to this discussion then it's taking place at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 March 28#Category:Glaswegians to Category:People from Glasgow, Scotland until 3 April. Valiantis 15:56, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Better Map Image??

Any thoughts on a better/more complete map image(ie location on plantet Earth)? If my daughter visited this site and wondered "where on the Earth this place was" it looks like it could be the Fiji Islands...actually went to Fiji site and they have a map showing relevant location on planet. TIA! Tom 15:00, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Outwith

Faslet, maybe that word use word be more appropriate on a Scottish Wikipedia site?? :) j/k

I added the (outside of) for us ugly Americans :) Thanks!

Found some good read on the subject..http://www.bloomfield.me.uk/entries/000676.htm

Outwith is a perfectly acceptable word, please do not change words or provide an explanation just because you do not understand the word or the usage of the word. Fraslet 19:41, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I see, you are the President of Wikipedia? Cool! How about I revert back and same the same thing to you? OK? Lets try that...Outside of is a perfectly acceptable wording...please do not change my edit.Tom 21:36, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

I really have no intention of having an edit war with you, it is however a distasteful precedent to change words that you do not understand, the world does not revolve around American English. Perhaps it would have been better for you to raise the "issue" on the talk page to start with and see what the majority decision was. Fraslet 22:23, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Fraslet, I'm Scottish, and I use this word, but I don't think it's worthwhile getting too pedantic about it. It's not used in this sense outside of Scotland (it would sound odd to English people, not just "American English" speakers), and even in Scotland, you tend to hear it used in a rather different sense, such as "outwith the scope of this contract" - even in Scotland, I would guess that most people would say "outside of London" rather than "outwith London". I don't like to see "American English" being imposed on UK-related/non-US related articles, but English, Welsh, Australian, Canadian people would find this word useage odd. Camillus (talk) 23:10, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Very valid point Fraslet. The first change was because I thought it was a simple typo(which I guess 99% of the public here,US, might make), I was WRONG and stood corrected and learned a new word which I will teach my children tonight :) I also agree that the world shouldn't revolve around American English but should default to what the majority of readers/users language is if there is such a thing. For example, most scientific papers are presented in English, ect. just for "simplicity sake. This is a Scottish topic so maybe the 2nd edit "outwith(outside of)" could work. I am happy to go with majority/neutral opinion. Thanks for keeping it civil. I also asked an administrator for their thoughts so I know how to edit going forward...ps I am of Scottish, Welsh, English, ect background and would LOVE to visit Glasgow someday..Cheers! :)Tom 23:22, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

We could argue about it in Gaelic if you like? I really am joking btw. Thanks for the dialogue, it has been a non-issue for a couple of hours though. I bow to the third opinion of another Bankie. Fraslet 23:19, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

- time to drink a beer here..later!Tom 23:26, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

- - I was asked to take a look at this issue by Tom and I'll just provide my input here: according to the Manual of Style, articles concerning British topics should generally use British English, and articles regarding American topics American English. However, whenever possible, a less ambigious word should be used if possible. In this case, from scanning the debate and our entry on outwith (which isn't exactly much of a help, as the entry uses the word itself), I would say go with a less ambigious word, because outwith may not be recognized by some parts of the United Kingdom. Whenever possible, a clearer word is the better choice. A caveat: I'm not an expert in this field and didn't spend too much time analyzing this debate; I'm only simply providing my opinion on request here. I hope this helps! Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 22:13, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm always amazed by the amount of trouble this simple word causes. If I use an obscure word like "cimmerian" no one turns a hair but God forbid that "outwith" should find its way into an article... -- Derek Ross | Talk 04:48, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Outwith is a perfectly valid word to use. --Mais oui! 09:25, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Mais oui, it seems from my limited research that "outwith"'s usage is more in regards to legal matters/documents rather than "general/location" usage. The top google search of the word provides a nice discussion page which I linked above, here it is again....http://www.bloomfield.me.uk/entries/000676.htm. Does its usage mean more "outside the scope/legal sense" rather than "outside of a physical location"? Also, Outwith could surely use more editing but I would defer to people with more experience/interest in the word. Bottom line, its not the word I edited, more it seemed like "outside of" was less ambigious to MOST of the people that might visit the page. Thanks! Tom 14:39, 3 April 2006 (UTC) ps I am going to add an example of the words usage on the Outwith page so please join me their and edit/correct at will!!

Outwith does indeed mean "outside the scope of" (although it's not just a legal term) more than physically outside (although it has that meaning too). As for expanding its article, that's an excellent idea, Tom. What always surprises me is that people generally have a good idea of what the word means the first time that they come across it. But they still don't feel comfortable with it. -- Cheers Derek Ross | Talk 15:35, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Scotland's largest city and unitary authority area

This is phrased wrongly. It sounds like it's saying Glasgow is the largest unitary authority area when in fact Highland is.

I think it means by population? not sure though. Maybe you could change that to Scotland's largest city and unitary authority area by population, hawd yer weeshed and dinny be so pernichity.

the city is not the largest in Scotland either. Both Edinburgh and Aberdeen are bigger at 260km sq and 182km sq respectively. Glasgow is the third largest city in Scotland at 175km sq. Can't help but think that this line: "...the largest city in Scotland and third most populous in the United Kingdom,' is a bit clumsy. "...Scotland's most populous city and the third most populous in the United Kingom,' or something along those lines might work better. Glasvegas3987 (talk) 00:56, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Football Stadia

The section Football currently says only Ibrox Stadium and Hampden park are the only such stadia in Glasgow. According to the Wikipedia page for Celtic Park it is a 5 star UEFA stadium. Having updated this here the page was returned to its previous state. Can it be double checked to make sure my information is correct before I correct the page again? Also, I believe Glasgow is now the only city in Europe with three 5 star stadia, hopefully this can be inserted to the page as well.

This probably doesn't help much but I thought I read somewhere a while ago that Celtic Park wasn't 5 star due to the dressing rooms not being large enough. I thought at the time this made sense as they're in the part of the ground that hasn't been re-developed.

--Baron Olivers 11:20, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

GraemeL

I linked the annotated map to a blog so that I could get a count of how many people were looking at the map. If enough use it I may do more. I also wanted to get any suggestions people had for improvements. If you dont like that just revert the article again. I wont bother to link to the map again.

R Pollack

OK, I understand. I'll let the link alone. I'm sorry if you thought my post to your talk page was patronising as that was not my intention. I was just trying to supply some advice.

Also, please be WP:CIVIL. I removed the personal attack from your message above. --GraemeL ^(talk) 20:44, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Coat of Arms

Emm, is the Glasgow City Coat of Arms not derived from the Univesity of Glasgow coat of arms, the univeristy's founding predates the glasgow coat by some years, i remember going on a tour where someone said this at the uni but cant find an actual fact about it on the web. Anyone? --81.156.4.12 00:45, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

CFD

The related Category:Members of the United Kingdom Parliament from Glasgow constituencies has been nominated for deletion. You are encouraged to join the discussion on the Categories for Discussion page.

--Mais oui! 09:31, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Context to "Statistics" on Crime and Quality of Life

Can we get some context into these "statistics"? First, the notion that Scotland is the most violent country in the developed world is just plain silly - see the quote in the cited article - "The study found that, excluding murder, Scots were almost three times as likely to be assaulted as Americans. Victims of crime in 21 countries were interviewed by the UN, but senior Scots police officers criticised the study. The survey concluded that 2,000 Scots were attacked every week. That figure is 10 times the number recorded in official police figures.'"

So even if we take this rather daft assertion seriously, which is difficult, given the criticism from the police, your kinda more likely to be attacked in Scotland as opposed to America, but less likely to be murdered - er, what would you rather?

So you're twice as likely to be murdered in Glasgow than in other parts of Scotland? Seriously, is it any surprise that most crime happens in a country's biggest city? Is there a country in the world where this isn't the case?

As regards Glasgow as being the least desirable place to stay - first, the cited article says that 13% of people in Glasgow were dissatisfied with where they say, whereas 66% of people in the Highlands and Islands are happy with where they stay. Does this mean that 87% of people in Glasgow are happy staying in Glasgow, and 34% of people in the Highlands and Islands are dissatisfied? Whatever, is it really surprising that people in the largest city think it'd be nicer to live in the country? It's the same in every country in the world, come on! Everybody in the big cities thinks it'd be nice to move to the country - only thing is when they get there, they miss their 24/7 shops, their cultural/sports facilities etc. etc. Meanwhile, all the young people from the Highlands and Islands come down to the central belt looking for jobs...

Lies, damned lies and statistics? Camillus (talk) 13:21, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Well said, Camillus. Glasgow may have its faults but these statistics are way off. -- Derek Ross | Talk 20:21, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm given that Glasgow has what ? 40-50 murders a year and Baltimore in the US which has a similar population has about 250-300 a year I think we can safely conclude that Glasgow is NOT the most violent city in the developed world....(apologies to any Baltimoreans visiting - I just picked that example because I am a "Wire" fan) Reynardthefox 18:27, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Favourite UK City - Conde Nast

Shouldn't we mention that Scotland won the Favourite UK City award 2006 by Conde Nast Traveller's Club? [8]. I think it was won by Glasgow a couple of years ago too... Camillus (talk) 19:24, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Err... do you mean "Scotland" won, or "Glasgow" won? --Mais oui! 20:21, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Yep - I meant Glasgow. So should it be mentioned? Camillus (talk) 10:26, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Kinda borderline. I am getting very concerned about the length of this article. It is currently 75 kilobytes long, which immediately disqualifies it from being considered for Featured article status. The Transport section needs a firm trimming (we have the subarticle Transport in Glasgow for the details), and we need to start up at least 2 more sub-articles to cut down those sections:

The Conde Nast info definitely belongs in our new Economy of Glasgow article, under a Tourism heading, but I'm not sure if it really qualifies for "top-billing" on this one. I may be wrong though, its just that I am not sure how significant Conde Nast are? --Mais oui! 12:05, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I take your point about the size of the article, but I do think the "award" deserves a mention somehere - Condé Nast are pretty significant, I would have thought - publishers of Vogue, GQ, Vanity Fair etc. etc. I admit I'm biased, as I love Glasgow, and think the still-prevalent image of Glasgow as a "Mean City" has to be countered :) Camillus (talk) 12:36, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Crime

You might have noticed the slight to and fro I have had with another editor on this section. I'd be interested in any other input to the debate. Thanks. --Guinnog 06:38, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Though I don't think there was anything wrong with my original edit. I don't mind your edit either. I did kinda want to link the idea that knifecrime was a problem with attempts by authorities to limit access to knives. In the article, you'll note it talks of people wishing to give sentences for people carrying knives. Let's see if anyone else says anything. I'll keep the edit the way you have written it for now. Nlsanand 19:25, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Density, Population etc.

Location	Population	Area (km²)	Density (/km²)	Area (mi²)	Density (/mi²)
Glasgow City Council^[1]	629,501	175.49	3293	85.75	8,528
City of Glasgow Locality^[2]	739,039	162.10	3883	95.58	10,058
Greater Glasgow Health Board	867,150	555.27	1562	290.38	4,044
Greater Glasgow Settlement Area^[3]	1,635,270	368.46	3171	350.12	8,212

This chart is very wrong. The square mile/square kilometer conversions are all wrong, as well as being inconsistant. 1 sq mile = 2.59 sq km. So is it the mile or kilometer figures (if either) that are correct? And what implication does that have for the density figures? What figures have been extrapolated from what others? FrFintonStack 00:46, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the table is very wrong - as well as the areas, most of the population figures are way out. The tables on Geography of Glasgow#Current statistics and Greater Glasgow#Population density appear to have the correct populations and areas. The best official source for this is SCROL, which has the 2001 census figures. Here's some proper references for these 4 locations:

Glasgow City Council area: [9]
Glasgow locality: [10]
Greater Glasgow Health Board: [11]
(Greater) Glasgow settlement: [12]

All of the official sources use square kilometres or hectares for area, so I presume the square miles have been calculated from them. --Vclaw 14:54, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Could someone do something about this? I have neither acess to the accurate information nor the editing skills, but it's frankly embarrassing for the article to have a table containing important demographic information on the city that isn't even internally coherent, let alone correct.FrFintonStack 19:32, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

There is still a lot of confusion. The intro gives the City of Glasgow population as 578,790, the "urban areas" as 1,749,154 and the "Greater Glasgow conurbation" as "around 2,300,000"; the infobox gives the "population" as 578,790 and the "metropolitan population" as 1,749,154; and the table gives the Glasgow City Council population as 578,790 and the "Greater Glasgow Urban Area" as 1,168,270. It would seem to me that the city proper has 578,790, the urban area has 1,168,270, and the metropolitan area - which is inherently ambiguous - has something between 1.7m and 2.3m. At any rate, some people are clearly getting confused between urban and metropolitan populations. Lfh 19:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Sighthill: not a hotbed of racist violence

The reference to racial tension in Sighthill gave the factually wrong impression that asylum seekers there were victimised by the native population. There was a nationally well publicised case of an asylum seeker being murdered in Sighthill some years ago - but what the national press did not eventually report was that he had been murdered by another asylum seeker to whom he owed money. Any research into inter-racial violence in the area will show that most of it occurs between the different ethnic minority groups thrown together in there, and thus it should not be portrayed (as it was) as a "white on black" thing.

Not quite true. Although I'm happy with your change to the main page, the case which brought most media interest was the murder of Firsat Dag by Scott Burrell. It was entirely unprovoked and didn't involve money. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/1711388.stm --ML5 16:58, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

In all, the mention of racial tension in this article is a complete red-herring, and a grave disservice to the Sighthill community, many of whom have always worked together to keep racial harmony at the forefront of affairs. I have trimmed it down, but feel tempted to cut it altogether.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.9.253.132 (talk • contribs)

Generally agree, as I found when I have visited Sighthill - many of the residents said the media reports were sensationalist and not representative of the generally harmonious relationships. However, I have a slight problem with "home to Glasgow's asylum seekers", as there are many other areas where asylum seekers have been placed, and Sighthill is also home to people who have been in Scotland for generations. (BTW, please sign posts with ~~~~, and place new comments at the bottom, ie. chronologically.) Camillus (talk) 15:11, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. With places like Toryglen housing a high % of asylum seekers, there is no valid reason to highlight Sighthill in this way (why mention asylum seekers at all in Glasgow, a city not unlike many others in this regard, other than to raise a non-existent race relations point?). This is purely a hangover from the sensationalist reports of a "race murder" there which turned out to be nothing of the sort. The national press descended on Sighthill when the ayslum seeker was killed, but virtually ignored the story when the fact that he had been killed by a fellow asylum seeker came to light. Wikipedia shouldn't make worse the distortion of Sighthill (or any area) already put in place by an irresponsible and agenda-driven press.~~~~

Oh please it's a disgusting place, full of disgusting people. I remember watching some of these racists march, wearing Celtic, Rangers & Scotland strips, thinking...your Highland/Irish ancestors probably faced the same thing. It's a place with a serious problem. 81.149.87.83 18:08, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Daniel Defoe

Dear Green Place is often misquoted as a Gaelic translation for the city, but this was actually Daniel Defoe's description of the city when he visited in the early 18th century; he also claimed that Glasgow was "the paradise of Scotland and one of the cleanliest and best built cities in Britain."

Anyone care to give a source for this? The usual quotation is "the cleanest and beautifullest and best built City in Britain, London excepted", and I hadn't heard that Defoe used the phrase "dear green place" -- that's one of the many suggested translations of the name Glasgchu, which is not really Gaelic but British (Brythonic). Flapdragon 00:16, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Corrected the quotation and moved it to a more relevant section. Flapdragon 12:10, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Green and grey in Gaelic

The idea that the glas of Glasgow means green is sometimes disputed locally. This is because the meaning of glas in Gaelic is not a single hue but rather a quality of colour. Specifically glas means a pale colour that can range from pale blue through pale green but very often implies simply a grey colour. (This contrasts with the more vibrant blue or green implied by the Gaelic word gorm.) Some locals point wryly to Glasgow weather claiming that glas is an appropriate description of the often grey overcast skies they feel they get more of their fair share of!

Reverted this on the grounds that:

the supposed derivation of the phrase is not Gaelic but Brythonic
"not a single hue but rather a quality of colour" doesn't really make a whole lot of sense
there are no sources given for the pointing wryly bit
the tone is hardly encylopaedic

Flapdragon 12:03, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I distinctly remember reading that the literal translation of "glaschu" was "grey water". If I can find the source, I'll edit with an alternative derivation if there are no objections.

User:airhole 15:33, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Also, if I recall correctly from my gaelic class, the demarkation of gaelic colours is not the same as english colours. For example: 'red' in gaelic can encompass what an english speaker would classify as 'pink' or 'orange'.--Fergie 10:27, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, Gaelic has different colour categories from English. You find this with many languages, and 'glas' refers to more of a greeny-grey colour but most likely means 'green' in this context. --Emma —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.192.215.180 (talk) 19:28, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

References

Can someone please fix the notes and references? I wouldn't know how to start to fix it. --Bloigen 22:28, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Done, also I have reverted the recent additions which damaged the references section and all of which where unsourced --Barry entretien 22:46, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

West End tearooms

The mention of Tchai-Uona (and only this tearoom) is blatant advertising. I'll remove it if there's no widespread outcry.RDT2 13:17, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

DoneRDT2 16:16, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Is it possible to advertise on Wikipedia if the link is only to an informant entry? I have no affiliation with Tchai-Ovna and think that it's existence has had a massive impact on the bohemian culture of the West End; many others would protest this also.dannerz!

Eh, wid Catherine Cranston no get a mention? .... dave souza, talk 21:43, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Dookits

Sport or cultyir? :) .... dave souza, talk 21:43, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Balclutha

Does anyone know if and how the name Balclutha relates to the name Glasgow? Boatman 12:56, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Clutha is Gaelic for 'Clyde' if that helps, but I've never actually heard 'Belclutha' being used in my life. --Breadandcheese 04:21, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Flag

I don't see the reason for the St Andrews Cross flag being inserted in the infobox. It's not particularly relevant insofar as it's clearly not a Glaswegian emblem. By inserting this completely unnecessary bit of window dressing, I believe the article opens itself up to accusations of preference as use of this flag clearly implies rejection of other flags: for example those of the UK or European Union.--Breadandcheese 04:21, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

On a similar note I have removed the little nest of flags beside the twinned towns section. I'd be interested to know, if anyone feels like replacing them, what actual encyclopedic value they add. --John 14:37, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Fundamentally, I think they were just of aesthetic value - not exactly encyclopaedic, I suppose. I do think the small flags do serve an encyclopaedic purpose on some occasions (lists of players in a football team, for example, to give an overall impression of nationality) but you're quite right, they were near-irrelevant here.--Breadandcheese 06:59, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Removal of GA and lots of help needed!

I've gone throught the bottom half of the article and done the following:

moved information into daugter articles
put tags on where citations are needed
removed a lot of wordy, weasley language
other minor changes for clarity and style

I've been doing this for hours now, and it's still only half done. I cannot fathom how this article ever got GA, so I've removed that. I'll do my best to keep coming back to help with the fixes but I've not even finished identifying the problems so pls, a little help? Please don't be offended at the GA removal. Glasgow is great, but the article isn't.Alun 09:57, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Photographs

I think this page is generally great - the only thing I think that lets the city down is the images here. Anyone got anything a bit...brighter? Anything to make the city look a bit more appealing? The pictures of the Clydeside and of Buchanan Street look, frankly, miserable and just don't do justice to how beautiful Glasgow can look on a clear, sunny day (they DO exist!). I'm not in the city at the moment or I'd have a go at taking a few myself.

Is there not also a chance of getting a picture of the city at the top of the page, above the map? Most 'major' cities seem to have this. I don't see why Glasgow, and for that matter Edinburgh too it seems, can't. And a decent photograph. Not one of the Finnieston Crane, please.

I wouldn't want this page perpetuating ANY myths regarding the perceived 'ugliness' of Glasgow. It is a beautiful, wonderful wonderful city.

I agree, particularly regarding Buchanan Street; a street that recently won an award for urban design!!! I've tried taking some snaps when I'm out and about, but my eye for a good photograph is dreadful and I end up ditching most of them. It's a shame we can't use some of the photos available via Flickr - they're amazing! There are some better photos of Glasgow landmarks on WikiCommons which we should probably make more use of; however, it's lacking here too. I've changed the Glasgow School of Art picture with something a little better (the focus of the last photograph was a 'no entry' road sign!), but there could be some improvement made using WikiCommons.GeorgeRob (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 08:00, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

As requested, I've inserted some better and extra photographs throughout the article using Creative Commons images from Flickr via the WikiCommons upload facility (a neat tool for reusing images from Flickr!). There are concerns that the article is getting too long so in the longer term it may be necessary to insert a gallery at the bottom.GeorgeRob (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 08:47, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Pronunciation

Is the ending an "ow" or an "oh?" And is the "s" pronounced as an "s" or as a "z"? I have forgotten my IPA, so I hope this is understandable. White Lightning 21:47, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Glazgo, basically. WATP ^(talk) • _(contribs) 22:13, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Yep thats about it, the IPA would be (pronounced ɡlæzɡəʊ) I think. --Barryob Vigeur de dessus 22:18, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

But is ɡlæzɡəʊ correct? Is it not more like ɡlazɡəʊ? I am a german living in scotland, but I'm sure the æ doesn't exist up here.--195.128.251.98 (talk) 21:52, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure there's no diphthong at the end when spoken with a Glaswegian accent, either. I think it's ɡlazɡo in IPA; possibly ɡlæzɡo. It depends on what accent you're transcribing. - Emma, 20:40, 27 May 2009

I think Glasgow warrants a picture in large cities article

Just because someone thinks the finnieston crane looks ugly does'nt lessen the fact that it's an important landmark and also reminds us how Glasgow became great. See Talk:Largest cities of the European Union by population within city limits#Pictures - UK cities. If someone has a suitably sized scene they should probably put a picture of Glasgow on this article. -- Q Chris 09:53, 3 September 2007

What was wrong with the picture of the finnieston crane? It's one of the most famous landmarks in the city and reminds us how Glasgow became great. --Sandbagger 23:14, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that was a good picture. But perhaps it failed to follow one of the obscure rules that images have to satisfy and got deleted. If so, it'd be great if someone could take another picture of the crane. -- Derek Ross | Talk 00:37, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Elphinstone Place

I think the Elphinstone Place skyscraper to be built in 2008/09 should be in the article as it will be the tallest builing in glasgow and the whole of scotland. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrew22k (talk • contribs) 16:00, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

panoramic view of Glasgow City Centre

Hi, can someone look at the "panoramic view of Glasgow City Centre from the top of The Lighthouse". I know it's panoramic and yes it states that but i can't help feel it is to big an image.

You can have that image on the page scalled down to help it fit, i don't like what it is done to the Glasgow page so can someone review it and deside the best action for the Glasgow Wikipedia page and not the image.

Thanks --82.11.152.242 13:18, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

It's fairly normal to have panoramic images like that on articles, see New York City for example. The Glasgow one looks a bit larger as its height is more than that of most panoramic pictures. I've resized it a bit. WATP ^(talk) • _(contribs) 13:43, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

GA Review notes

OK - I'll begin a list of fixes for GA status here: cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:24, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

The present site of Glasgow has been used since prehistoric times for settlement due to it being the forded point of the River Clyde furthest downstream, which also provided a natural area for salmon fishing - this is a little ungainly. Consider splitting into two sentences or rewriting. Commas are ok but be wary of too many.

However by the 1960s, a lack of investment and innovation led to growing overseas competition in countries like... - I know this may be tricky but this sounds really vague. What/how does the innovation refer to?

The city experienced mixed fortunes during 20th century - try "The city's fortunes were mixed during the 20th century"

Glasgow entered a long running period of relative economic malaise, - malaise refers to sickness, though I agree it is becoming more generalised in usage. I think "decline" or somesuch term would be more appropriate.

...and poor health for the city's inhabitants. - ?? - I think this is controversial and needs some clarification and referencing (though I agree may be true :) )

There were active attempts at regeneration of the city,.. - would be better to clarify which bodies were trying to regenerate the city here.

::However, by the 1990s, there had been a significant resurgence in Glasgow's economic fortunes, as the city found a new role as a European centre for business services and finance, as well as benefiting from an increase in tourism and inward investment. - don't need a comma before the 'as' maybe better to have two sentences with a semicolon between.

~~In the Climate section you could combine the last 3 stubby paras.~~ The first sentence also reads oddly.

the urban conurbation around the city. - erm, 'urban' redundant here?

In Economy section:

~~::Glasgow is the largest and most dynamic economy in Scotland - not sure but 'dynamic' may be too subjective sounding? thriving better?~~

~~Last 2 sentences stick out a bit and could be incorporated into preceding paras somewhere.~~

These housing estates, known as "schemes", are widely regarded as unsuccessful: many, - should be semicolon not colon here.

::Some of the high-rise developments were poorly designed and cheaply built and became magnets for crime. Over time some have become as bad as the slum areas that they replaced, though at the time of construction they were largely welcomed. - problematic - magnets could be replaced by more formal word, and 'bad' should be replaced my a more exact adjective - crime-ridden or whatever you want to get across.

The main shopping centres are Buchanan Galleries and the St. Enoch Centre, as well as Princes Square and the Italian Centre, with more specialised and designer labels. - are all 4 main, or just the first 2 and the 2nd 2 more specialised - needs to be rephrased to highlight this.

..further strengthening Glasgow's already impressive retail portfolio,... - eeeww, sounds like advertorial....

~~::...Glasgow's gay scene... - is this the most politically correct way to phrase this? Maybe 'gay and lesbian' is better. Actually the paragraph could be written in a wee bit more formal tone.~~

In The West End - fix cite tags.

operators but SPT part-funds some services. - 'though' better here.

Overall the prose is OK and this should pass GA readily as the stuff above is straightofrward. Good work so far. WRT working towards FAC, the prose needs some more polishing - need to watch repetition of 'Glasgow' and look to reduce this without introducing ambiguity. There are alot of stubby paras in the last few sections that aren't deal-breakers for GA but would be for FA. Good luck. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:05, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello. I am the one who nominated the article for GA but I did not write the article. I tried to fix some of the issues you pointed out even though my English is not very good. If everything is OK can you please pass this. Otherwise strike the issues that I fixed and find the people who wrote the article. Tell them to fix the other issues. --Kaypoh (talk) 08:46, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Ummm..yeah. If this were FAC I'd jump in and do it myself btu I can't really do that here. Plus I can't see myself prioritizing the cite tags. I can leave a note for the main contributers. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:25, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't see why you cannot jump in and do it yourself. --Kaypoh (talk) 12:42, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Erm, according to the rules I can't then pass it. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:47, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Is there a rule that if you place the nomination on hold and then fix the issues you can't pass the article? I think the "you cannot review an article if you have made significant contributions to it" only means contributions you made before reviewing the article, not after. --Kaypoh (talk) 13:14, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

There is no rule about fixing issues in an article you are reviewing, I've done it to all the GAs I've passed and its been done by the reviewer in plenty of GAs I've been involved in.

I've found another issue- the references are badly formatted. I'l fix them tomorrow, unless someone wishes to go first and save me the trouble. Lurker (said · done) 17:27, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the whole statement about the thriving economy. It is POV, and the same site used as a source for this says Edinburgh has the strongest economy of any UK city outside London. Lurker (said · done) 17:37, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

My hands are tied - I didn't feel so good about the economy bit. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:30, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

GA passed

OK, in summary I think whatever minor bits and pieces are not dealbreakers for GA status. This is shaping up rather nicely for a crack at FA at some stage. For this it needs:

referencing - estimate another 80 odd at least.
fixing stubby listy paras into nicer rounded paragraphs in latter part of article.
more copyediting

Good luck whoever takes it on. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:40, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Daniel Defoe

Dear Green Place is often misquoted as a Gaelic translation for the city, but this was actually Daniel Defoe's description of the city when he visited in the early 18th century; he also claimed that Glasgow was "the paradise of Scotland and one of the cleanliest and best built cities in Britain."

Anyone care to give a source for this? The usual quotation is "the cleanest and beautifullest and best built City in Britain, London excepted", and I hadn't heard that Defoe used the phrase "dear green place" -- that's one of the many suggested translations of the name Glasgchu, which is not really Gaelic but British (Brythonic). Flapdragon 00:16, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Corrected the quotation and moved it to a more relevant section. Flapdragon 12:10, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Green and grey in Gaelic

The idea that the glas of Glasgow means green is sometimes disputed locally. This is because the meaning of glas in Gaelic is not a single hue but rather a quality of colour. Specifically glas means a pale colour that can range from pale blue through pale green but very often implies simply a grey colour. (This contrasts with the more vibrant blue or green implied by the Gaelic word gorm.) Some locals point wryly to Glasgow weather claiming that glas is an appropriate description of the often grey overcast skies they feel they get more of their fair share of!

Reverted this on the grounds that:

the supposed derivation of the phrase is not Gaelic but Brythonic
"not a single hue but rather a quality of colour" doesn't really make a whole lot of sense
there are no sources given for the pointing wryly bit
the tone is hardly encylopaedic

Flapdragon 12:03, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I distinctly remember reading that the literal translation of "glaschu" was "grey water". If I can find the source, I'll edit with an alternative derivation if there are no objections.

User:airhole 15:33, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Also, if I recall correctly from my gaelic class, the demarkation of gaelic colours is not the same as english colours. For example: 'red' in gaelic can encompass what an english speaker would classify as 'pink' or 'orange'.--Fergie 10:27, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, Gaelic has different colour categories from English. You find this with many languages, and 'glas' refers to more of a greeny-grey colour but most likely means 'green' in this context. --Emma —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.192.215.180 (talk) 19:28, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

References

Can someone please fix the notes and references? I wouldn't know how to start to fix it. --Bloigen 22:28, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Done, also I have reverted the recent additions which damaged the references section and all of which where unsourced --Barry entretien 22:46, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

West End tearooms

The mention of Tchai-Uona (and only this tearoom) is blatant advertising. I'll remove it if there's no widespread outcry.RDT2 13:17, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

DoneRDT2 16:16, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Is it possible to advertise on Wikipedia if the link is only to an informant entry? I have no affiliation with Tchai-Ovna and think that it's existence has had a massive impact on the bohemian culture of the West End; many others would protest this also.dannerz!

Eh, wid Catherine Cranston no get a mention? .... dave souza, talk 21:43, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Dookits

Sport or cultyir? :) .... dave souza, talk 21:43, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Balclutha

Does anyone know if and how the name Balclutha relates to the name Glasgow? Boatman 12:56, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Clutha is Gaelic for 'Clyde' if that helps, but I've never actually heard 'Belclutha' being used in my life. --Breadandcheese 04:21, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Flag

I don't see the reason for the St Andrews Cross flag being inserted in the infobox. It's not particularly relevant insofar as it's clearly not a Glaswegian emblem. By inserting this completely unnecessary bit of window dressing, I believe the article opens itself up to accusations of preference as use of this flag clearly implies rejection of other flags: for example those of the UK or European Union.--Breadandcheese 04:21, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

On a similar note I have removed the little nest of flags beside the twinned towns section. I'd be interested to know, if anyone feels like replacing them, what actual encyclopedic value they add. --John 14:37, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Fundamentally, I think they were just of aesthetic value - not exactly encyclopaedic, I suppose. I do think the small flags do serve an encyclopaedic purpose on some occasions (lists of players in a football team, for example, to give an overall impression of nationality) but you're quite right, they were near-irrelevant here.--Breadandcheese 06:59, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Removal of GA and lots of help needed!

I've gone throught the bottom half of the article and done the following:

moved information into daugter articles
put tags on where citations are needed
removed a lot of wordy, weasley language
other minor changes for clarity and style