Talk:Clannada na Gadelica
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
|
This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Should you wish to make any substantial changes or additions;
(This message should only be placed on talk pages, please.) |
Contents |
[edit] Removal of entirely accurate disclaimer at start of article
"Biased and unsupported statement"; That made me laugh. As a Gael, originating from the last Gaelic region of Scotland i know very well this article to be misleading ( i was tempted to write "utter nonsense" but that would indeed be biased ) as absolutely nobody within Gaelic Scotland has anything to do with this movement. Indeed those few ( very very few ) who have any knowledge of the existence of this movement deride it utterly. By all means write an article on this phenomenon but at least have the honesty to state clearly that it is unconnected to the Gaels or existing/surviving Gaelic culture and community. The situation in Ireland with the Irish Gaels may be different to that within Scotland, but i very much doubt it. In fact unless you can provide legitimate sources which prove the tangible link between the movement described within this article and the Gaels of either Scotland or Ireland the disclaimer is entirely valid and necessary (within an article which is of a very dubious validity in the first place - google "Gaelic traditionalism" and you get roughly 900 hits with this very page no.1 - not the mark of a legitimate or wikipedia worthy subject). siarach 00:09, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
- If you choose to speak for the whole of the Gaelic communities in Ireland and Scotland, present your credentials that permit you to speak for entire, and disparate, populations, and provide sources for your claims that you make in the statement in question. I am again removing the statement until you can do so, and if you put it back up without sources or citations from officially recognized representatives of Scotland and Ireland's governments, particularly the ministries of Culture or similar, then it will be considered an inapropriate edit and a petition will be filed to lock the article and remove your edits. If you cannot keep your bias out of it, then do not edit. As for the need for a disclaimer, it is stated quite clearly that this is a movement that is found largely within the Diasporan Gaelic populations of the Americas and elsewhere.--Breandán 05:42, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- An amusing response, not least for how open it is to be turned back upon you entirely. Present my credentials? Well beyond the previously stated fact that i am actually a Gael, who actually hails from the Gaelic region and community and am involved in one of the Gaelic organisations and have absolutely no vested interest in this article or what it deals with beyond ensuring that it does not provide a misleading impression of the movement it describes im not sure what exactly to put forward. The claims that this movement is found within the "Gaelic diaspora" is again i think little more, if anymore, valid than any claims to links to the existing Gaelic communities. Im pretty sure that the Gaelic diaspora ( or more accurately their descendants, they are not longer Gaelic themselves ) - which can be found mostly in parts of the Americas such as Novia Scotia, Newfoundland perhaps Boston etc - are no more involved in this pagan movement than their relatives in the Old World who have maintained the language and culture. You demand citations from officially recognised representatives of Scotland and Ireland's governments "particularly ministries of Culture or similar" - this especially made me chuckle - seemingly without realising that in doing so you open yourself up to the very same demand ; provide citaitons from officially recognised representatives of the "Gaelic diaspora" ( for example, perhaps Rodney MacDonald, the Nova Scotian Premier, or Ken Nilsen, Professor of Celtic studies at St. Francis Xavier University, could well be said to represent this diaspora, which is strongest in that region so perhaps you should get in touch with them to vouch for your movement ;) ). Reading through this article im mystified as to why youve even bothered to name it ( or your movement ) as "Gaelic traditionalism" when what is described within it has no link to recognisable Gaelic culture which has existed for at least the last 1,000 or possibly even 1,500 years . Pre-Christian Celtic Traditionalism would be more honest or perhaps even "Celtic traditionalism" but Gaelic traditionalism is utterly misleading as a description for a movement which bears no relation to the existing Gaelic world, the current Gaels or their ancestors. By all means create an informative article on your movement, but do so honestly and without attributing links or a basis in an existing culture which simply does not exist. siarach 09:56, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- First off, I did not name it Gaelic Traditionalism. I am not a Gaelic Traditionalist. We started out as an entirely seperate group that worked together for a time with the Clannada na Gadelica to develop this article and related materials, and for a brief period of time some of us did use the term, but it was not developed by me or anyone else within the circles I associate. Second, you made a blanket claim that no one within Ireland or Scotland supports the movement, which is patently false. It may not have widespread support, but it does have its supporters as evidenced by material presented by the Clannada na Gadelica. I am not here to defend the article, or the Clannada, but to try and keep it within the standards set forth by wikipedia. I understand that there are people who criticize this movement, but so far only a tiny handfull have stepped forward to make such statements, not the nations of Ireland and Scotland as a whole. Unless you are qualified as a government official to make a statement for the entire country, then you can only speak for yourself unless you provide documentation to the contrary. Nowhere in my statements did I claim to speak for entire nations, or even the GT movement, whereas you did. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
- Since this discussion shows no sign of being able to remain civil, and since I have better things to do than argue the same issues again and again with three people who seem obsessed with this article, this matter has been sent up the chain for oversight. Frankly, I advocated the article's deletion a long time ago, but if it is to remain, then it should remain free of personal bias, yours, mine, or anyone else's, and stick to the facts. I am finished dealing with this article, as I have nothing to do with the GT movement anymore, and it is up to them to defend it if they wish. Contact the Clannada na Gadelica if you wish to argue the matter, or petition the article's deletion if you wish. --Breandán 20:57, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- A charaid, I agree with you entirely, and this point has been made by me, various Scots, and Irish (Gaelic speaking or no). Gaelic Traditionalism has little support in any of the Gaelic countries, amongst Gaelic speaking communities, Highlands & islands, West Ireland, or areas which were recently so. Come to think of it, I doubt there are many, if any, in the big cities of Scotland and Ireland either. Wicca and Druidism are probably more popular here.
-
- If you choose to speak for the whole of the Gaelic communities in Ireland and Scotland, present your credentials that permit you to speak for entire, and disparate, populations, and provide sources for your claims that you make in the statement in question.
- I can. Quite simply An Siarach claims to be a Scottish Gaelic speaker, and despite there being lots of pretenders to various things online, what he says rings true to me, since I've got some familiarity with Highland and Hebridean Scotland, and even the Isle of Man. I'm weaker on Ireland, but ken enough about the place to know that Gaelic Traditionalism stinks of what we call in Scotland, "guff". I'm good friends with native/fluent speakers of all three Gaelic tongues. --MacRusgail 16:21, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- If you feel it is "guff" then petition for the deletion of the article. I would support such a move, as I posted it originally and no longer support the movement it describes.--Breandán 20:57, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- A Bhreandain, I feel that the content is guff, but that the movement is probably just about big enough for its own article. You've been writing a piece of evangelism for your religion - wikipedia is not meant to be an advert for any kind of religion, whether it be Wee Free (traditional Gaelic!), Bahais, Jains or Zoroastrians. Your article must be a) factual, b) not misleading, c) not biased and d) well-researched. --MacRusgail 17:45, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Odd.
An Siarach asked me to come here and contribute to the discussion, so here I am.
Clannada na Gadelica is an organisation that is familiar to me, but AFAIK, they are the only ones who are serious about any sort of 'Gaelic Traditionalism' in the sense described in this article. I have never even heard of this term in the context found here except in reference to Clannada na Gadelica, and both diasporan Celtic groups as well as self-styled Celtic neopagan groups of various sorts are quite well known to me in a wide variety of incarnations.
This being so, I propose that this article be trimmed down to something resembling an encylopaedic standard (per Wikipedia conventions) and transfer it into a new article on Clannada na Gadelica itself, with the presumption that no other groups of any significance can be mentioned which also adhere to what this article describes as 'Gaelic Traditionalism'.
→ P.MacUidhir (t) (c) 18:22, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- I agree with MacUidhir. This whole article is based on the beliefs of Clannada na Gadelica, which seems to be the only organized group holding these beliefs. As such, I think, at the very least, this page should be moved to Clannada na Gadelica.--WilliamThweatt 21:59, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Requested move
Gaelic Traditionalism → Clannada na Gadelica – Rationale: The page is basically an explanation or apologetics page for a group named Clannada na Gadelica. "Gaelic Traditionalism" is a misleading term that they made up to describe their obscure "movement" which is neither "Gaelic" nor "Traditional". It is based on what is known of pre-Christian, "Celtic" beliefs and practices. Using the group's terminology for the article name is POV- and agenda-pushing. Therefore, I recommend moving to the group's name, "Clannada na Gadelica", and redirecting the current page there.--WilliamThweatt 22:24, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Survey
- Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
- Support, I've been watching this article in confusion for months. What was said above about CnG finally makes sense, and the fact that we don't even have an article on the organization just makes this even more appropriate, IMO. -- nae'blis (talk) 22:29, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
- Support and remove any unreferenced discussion of supposed "movement" outside of CnG, because without the move / removal of unrefernced material the article would probably need to be AfDed. --Craig Stuntz 01:02, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
- Weak Support Gaelic traditionalism should be reserved for things like the "Support bilingualism; speak Gaelic" button available in Nova Scotia...Septentrionalis 16:23, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
- I agree "Gaelic traditionalism" could be seen as an unrelated, though unorganized, movement among Scots and Irish to preserve their traditional Gaelic culture and language (as opposed to English culture/language). But I think is it safe to create a redirect until that article is written. When/If it is, then we can just add the "this article refers to 'x', for 'y', see CnG" template to the top for disambiguation.--WilliamThweatt 16:53, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
- Support - I feel the article is misnamed, and there are some wild claims in it, and it would clarify things if this was done. Too much evangelism and POV currently on this page. --MacRusgail 19:33, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Discussion
- Add any additional comments
[edit] "Gaelic Diaspora"
The way this phrase is used in the article might still be confusing. It is my understanding that the phrase "Gaelic Diaspora" is already in use to refer to the areas outside of the Celtic Nations where Gaeilge or Gàidhlig is still the main language (or one of the main languages) established and spoken in the commmunity at large. This would refer to areas like Cape Breton in Nova Scotia. So I don't think it's accurate to say this group, though well-intentioned, coined the phrase, or that it is commonly used to refer to those of Irish and Scottish ethnicity. Perhaps it would be more accurate and less inflammatory to change the phrase in this article to "Irish and Scottish Diaspora" or something else that would avoid this confusion. --Martin MacGrath 17:07, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
- I didn't like the term either, but I went with it because that is the term they use and I couldn't find any source using it a different way. My understanding of the typical usage of the phrase is the same as yours, but I couldn't find any source using it that way. --WilliamThweatt 18:37, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Continued Cleanup in line with Renaming and Refocusing of Article
I've gone through and tried to bring the rest of the text into line with the new name and focus of this article, based on what CnG members have written here, and what I was able to learn about the group on the web during this process. I've tried to clarify the controversial phrases while, when necessary, covering both viewpoints, and removed or minimized the use of disputed terms when it would be redundant to keep pointing out conflicts between the traditional meanings and the re-framings or redefinitions that appeared in the earlier versions of this article. --Martin MacGrath 16:34, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
- It's looking better, I'm not familiar enough with the group to change it all at once or to give their POV, but I have been trying to take out their propoganda. Do you have an English translation of the name? I am mildly familliar with Scottish Gaelic but know nothing of Irish, thus I'm not confident enough to give a properly nuanced translation.--WilliamThweatt 18:37, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
This article's a real mess, with lots of "they claim that" and "they say that" sentences, and not so much about who they are as a group. —Ashley Y 19:32, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
There has been an end run around what has been a mostly agree upon body. This new set of changes by unknown parties is mostly inaccurate.
[edit] Not notable?
Are there any references to this group besides its own website? If not this article should probably be deleted. —Ashley Y 00:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
