Talk:Galloway

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article needs to be split up as there is also a breed of cow by this name. GerardM 12:07, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Bernicia?

Wans't Bernicia on the east coast?

  • Yes it was. There was some Anglian settlement (cf Ruthwell Cross), but I find the idea that the entire area became Bernician a stretch. The article is very Anglo-Saxonist in many ways. --MacRusgail 21:50, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
Agreed there. This article is of low quality, esp. compared with the information otherwise available on wiki on the ancient kingdom. I'm tempted to put a clean-up tag on it. It certainly does badly need to be rewritten. Calgacus 22:51, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
Definitely needs a rewrite. I think the other problem is that of Galloway, which has fluctuated in size over the centuries. There's definitely better stuff in other articles like you say... perhaps a paragraph or two could be pinched from elsewhere if it's relevant? --MacRusgail 21:03, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Upper and Galloway

Morwen - I'm reverting your additions on Upper and Lower Galloway. This source suggests a north-south split rather than an east-west split. By the way, I'm not sure the upper/lower terminology is common enough to merit first-paragraph inclusion. Any better sources would be welcome. Regards, - Crosbiesmith 18:28, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Lived in Galloway for very many years, and have never heard the upper-west/lower-east phraseology. It also doesn't logically sit well, "upper" containing the most southern point not only in the area but also in the whole of Scotland. TBH as the gazetteer says, the more common split on things is to divide the relatively flat, settled, farmed, costal plain from the sparsely populated (large areas up there with the highlands for people per sq mile) upland hills/mountains - thus usage of upper implies upland and lower lowland rather than east/west. I have reverted the Wigtownshire and Kirkcudbrightshire definitions for consistency - I don't know what should be done with UG, WG & LG, currently they are implying incorrect definitions - but are probably far too specific for individual articles. SFC9394 18:49, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
See the comments on Talk:Counties of Scotland. Seems like these East/West Upper/Lower splits were common in the C19th. Cheers, Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:09, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
They certainly aren't incorrect! Check any c. 19th gazetteer. "I've never heard of ths usage" is not a reason to believe it is incorrect. I'm going to reinstate my changes, with a specific source this time. Morwen - Talk 21:40, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
It is a reason to not have it in the intro of an article - to do otherwise is to misinterpret - I quote from the content you inserted "comprising two areas: West or Upper Galloway .... and East or Lower Galloway," - to people in 19C it was - to people today it is not. SFC9394 21:48, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
You removed it entirely, as if i had made it up or it was spurious. I'm not inclined to make stuff up, even if I don't always cite things perfectly. Looking at my sources I see "East" and "West" Galloway are far more established. I shall be sure qualify things to your satisfaction. I think however that fact that at one point Galloway was being treated as a single unit, with Kirkcudbright and Wigtown as subdivisions, is very relevant to an article about Galloway. The articles about the 2 had in fact said "it was also sometimes known as" which actually is a pretty weak statement. Morwen - Talk 21:51, 23 October 2006 (UTC)