Talk:Highland (council area)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Disambiguation[edit]

I am seeing a need for some disambiguation as regards the names of now historic districts and a need for articles named for the districts. Please see Caithness District (1975 to 1996). Laurel Bush 16:54, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC).

Chief executive[edit]

Who is the authority's chief executive? This information seems much more pertinent than names of MPs and MSPs. Laurel Bush 18:24, 5 August 2005 (UTC).[reply]

page name[edit]

I think this article should be moved to the Highland Council area, both to avoid ambiguity with the many other uses of the word 'highland', and not least because the website of the body itself, [1], refers to itself always as the Highland Council, and its area both as the Highland Council area and the Highlands - but never simply Highland. I shall do this presently if there are no objections. 80.255 20:53, 13 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm inclined to agree with you, but can we lose the definite article and have it at Highland Council area? — Trilobite (Talk) 08:59, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The point of the definite article was to ensure that the term "Highland Council area" doesn't find itself being used as a proper noun (There are many lochs in Highland Council area, etc.). As the council always refers to itself as "the Highland Council", I feel that a definite article is justified in this case, even though I can understand your objection to it. None the less, moving the article to Highland Council area would still be a worthwhile improvement. 80.255 14:06, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
At the risk of having stirred up a hornet's nest here by raising this question, wouldn't it be better to find out from Highland Council whether there is an official designation for the area covered by the council (I am emailing the Chief Executive's office to ask). I note on their homepage that there is one reference to "Community portal in Highland". I would suggest that this is shorthand, and that the article title is also acceptable on this basis, but the reason I made the statements about not using "Highland" as a noun was that I found in another article the words "Dingwall in Highland" and wanted to make it clear that this was not, in my opinion, normal prose. There are 5130 hits on Google for "the highland council area", on the other hand the Highland Council's own website [2] seems to use a mixture of "The Highlands", "The Scottish Highlands and Islands", "The Highland Community", and indeed "Highland", for instance on this page [3].--PeterR 16:00, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The use of 'Highland' as a noun is rather like, for example, the use of the term City of York without the definite article. It would clearly be a nonsense to decribe something as being "in City of York", and, I believe it is similarly bad to describe something as being "in Highland". Although I acknowledge your example, it does seem to be very much the exception to the rule, and "the Highlands" seem to be used much more.
I don't think this, even as 'shorthand' is acceptable in an encyclopaedia, where we should have high standards of English. Besides this, a title such as Highland Council area tells the reader far more about the actual subject of the article, and is far less ambiguous. Highland itself is a general term for a specific type of terrain found worldwide, and it is questionable as to whether it should automatically redirect to an pretty obscure scottish council area anyway. 80.255 16:16, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
LOL @ "pretty obscure Scottish council area" I guess from some perspectives it is pretty obscure, but I'd guess it's the unitary authority with the largest area in the UK, and there are over 200,000 people here, mostly within a small radius of Inverness.
One further question. Since the "Highland Council area" probably exists for few other purposes than those of "the Highland Council" and we already have an article about the Scottish Highlands, could the article be entitled "Highland Council" (and re-written slightly)? --PeterR 18:50, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I've now had an email from the Policy Officer in the Chief Executive's Department at Highland Council. Amongst other things he says "There is no official designation for the area, only the Council. .... There is no easy answer to your question from a geographic perspective. That is why we often use the phase, the area of The Highland Council."
So, having read that response from Highland Council I am now happy if someone wishes to rename the article as the "Highland Council area" or re-write it so that it instead describes the "Highland Council" --PeterR 08:19, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As per the discussion above of a few months ago, I request deletion of Highland council area page in order to move this article back to its proper title. 80.255 01:25, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with much of the above discussion, and I think it makes sense to call the article 'Highland Council area', short for the Highland Council area, where 'Highland' is an adjective, like 'British'. '(The) Highland Council' would also make sense and, indeed, that is what the council appears to call itself. As of 26th December, the article has been renamed as 'Highland (council area)'. I don't think this does make sense. It can't be short for The Highland (council area), so it seems to treat Highland as a proper noun. I agree with User:80.255 that this is a bad thing Crosbiesmith 20:12, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why not treat Highland as a proper noun? It does happen, and I cant see any good reason why it should not. Laurel Bush 11:13, 10 January 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Fair question. According to my Collins Concise English Dictionary, 'Highland' is a proper noun. So now I'm in the awkward position of disagreeing with Collins, Merriam-Webster and Wikipedia. I still think it's an unusual usage, and I would prefer not to to see it in an article title. I realise though, yet further, that this issue is less cut-and-dried than I had supposed. I'm not in a position to comment on the proper use of Highland as a noun, as I was unaware that such a usage even existed. Would I be right in thinking that, even if 'Highland' is a correct term for the council area, nobody would ever talk about 'The Highland'? Therefore, if the council, on its main web-page, refers to itself as "The Highland Council", then it's actually, in this case, using 'Highland' as an adjective or modifer and not as a noun. If it were using 'Highland' as a noun, it would refer to itself as simply "Highland Council"? It does do this sometimes, but that is not the usual usage. I know I'm getting into finer points here, but I'm just trying to understand, in formal terms, why 'Wick, Highland' sounds odd to me, whilst 'Wick, The Highlands' sounds okay - Crosbiesmith 19:34, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Denial of the usability of Highland as a noun is akin to denial of the usability of United Kingdom as an adjective. The latter denial perpetuates usage of British where United Kingdom would be more appropriate. Laurel Bush 15:45, 12 January 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Continuing from above, I don't believe United Kingdom can be used as an adjective, not even according to my Collins English dictionary. - Crosbiesmith 19:34, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose page move. It would make Highland the only subdivision of Scotland using that form. The standard Wikipedia title for all these entities in "X", not "X Council" or "X Council area". Have a look at Category:Unitary authorities of Scotland. (PS. the entire Wikipedia prentation of the subdivisions of Scotland - both modern and historic - is disinctly second-rate. We really ought to establish a new Wikipedia:WikiProject Subdivisions of Scotland to co-ordinate the considerable work required.--Mais oui! 15:59, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It would make Highland the only subdivision using that form. However Highland Council is a real exception. In each of the other council names, "X Council", X is regularly used alone. People might say that council taxes are too high in Fife, or council taxes are too high in the Borders, or that council taxes are too high in Aberdeen. People don't usually say, 'council taxes are too high in Highland'. Do they? Maybe they do. I can't quite put my finger on what's bothering me, but there's something odd about this name, not least the fact that the council sometimes call themselves 'Highland Council', and sometimes call themselves 'the Highland Council'. I admit my arguments aren't watertight, but I don't think it is clear-cut in either direction. - Crosbiesmith 19:34, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see User:Laurel Bush/Workshop I. It is about Subdivisions of Scotland, and not yet full developed. I am planning also, in the same workshop, a 'redraft' of Council areas of Scotland (currently a redirect to Subdivisions). I would welcome comment in the workshop's tallk page. Laurel Bush 16:18, 12 January 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Good start. But a WikiProject is a much better forum. You have missed out several historical units like Burgh, Large burgh, Small burgh, Burgh of Barony, Police burgh, Mormaerdom, Earldom etc; and some modern subdivisions, eg Royal burgh. Please note that "Subdivisions of X" is the Wikpedia naming convention for the main, modern subdivisions of all countries, so please do not move it to Council areas of Scotland.--Mais oui! 16:51, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The map[edit]

The map fails to include Orkney and Shetland as politically part of Scotland. They are not even depicted in an inset map, as is often done with remote territorial fragments such as islands and exclaves in order to save "empty map space". The same goes for maps of the United Kingdom and England, which sometimes fail to take into account that the Isles of Scilly and of Wight are in England, and not a foreign country like the Man. Perhaps these maps should be altered to reflect this? //Big Adamsky 20:55, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

Highland (council area) → Highland – there is no need for disambiguation.--Mais oui! 16:11, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Voting[edit]

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~
  • Support--Mais oui! 16:11, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support--Highland is perfectly usable as a noun. Laurel Bush 16:34, 12 January 2006 (UTC).[reply]
  • Oppose -- disambiguation is required, see below - Crosbiesmith 19:34, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Already included at number 2 on the disambiguation page. --Cactus.man 07:46, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose- I think Scottish Highlands covers a larger area than the Highland Council Area. Astrotrain 11:27, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Too Caledocentric. Highland should link to disambiguation - LuiKhuntek 00:25, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support-- I support a change to either Highland or Highlands. The signs say "Welcome to the Highlands", not "Welcome to Highland (council area)". Kris_sw 01:41, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - There is no Highland (traditional) article to disambiguate with. josh (talk) 20:49, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - should be moved to Highland Council instead if that's its official name. Stringops 17:46, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

Add any additional comments
  • You only need to add bracketed descriptors after titles if disambiguation is required. It is not.--Mais oui! 16:11, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the council is the main, or even a usual, use of 'Highland', so therefore disambiguation is required. If this page is to remain at Highland, I think it should take its place on the list at Highland (disambiguation) - Crosbiesmith 19:34, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure the Scottish Highlands would include areas outwith the Highland Council Area. Astrotrain 11:26, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think Scottish Highlands covers a larger area than the Highland Council Area. This is a good reason for using Highland as a noun. Denial of its usability as a noun encourages confusing use of the Highlands to mean Highland, as is the case in a lot of Highland Council literature. (The council claims to represent the Highlands.) Laurel Bush 10:50, 16 January 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Not moved, no consensus. —Nightstallion (?) 09:46, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Council political composition: 11 Lib Dems?[edit]

I note the statement that 11 councillors are Liberal Democrats. I am able to find just 7 Liberal Democrats in Highland Council wards and councillors 2003 to 2007. Laurel Bush 10:07, 17 May 2006 (UTC).[reply]

CFD[edit]

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

--Mais oui! 09:34, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Area committees to be abolished[edit]

This statement is now somewhat dated:
This council maintains area committees named after the old districts
The area committees are about to be abolished, except re Inverness (where there will be major changes to committee area boundaries).
At present, however, I lack precise details re Invernes, eg names of wards to be included in the new Inverness area.
Laurel Bush 11:28, 15 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Highland Council HQ architecture[edit]

Would I be right in thinking that the council HQ buildings represent a re-use of premises of the historic Inverness county council? Apart from the way advertised by council billboards fronting Glenurqhart Road, the buildings not unattractive. Laurel Bush 14:46, 6 July 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Highland arms.png[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Highland arms.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 07:19, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Highlandlogo.png[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Highlandlogo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:41, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shetland islands[edit]

The map in the info box presumably shows Schotland. However, it fails displaying the Shetland islands. Hope somebody can fix that. Tomeasy (talk) 16:52, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Flag[edit]

Has Highland regional Flag? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.86.230.114 (talk) 10:42, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Political representation section seems to need daily updates[edit]

The political representation section seems to need daily updates. SNP are now out of the administration, and councillors seem to be changing group/party on a daily basis. 212.219.203.252 (talk) 14:22, 26 June 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Area[edit]

Is the area correct because it says 30,000km2 but the council place by area says its 25,000

Crofting Villages[edit]

I notice that the list of villages in Highland omits crofting villages such as Dalhalvaig and Croick. Is there a reason for this? And how would one learn where they fit into the geopolitical structure? Their respective stubs in Wikipedia do not offer much in the way of explanation. Texastriviaguy (talk) 18:13, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Explanation of deletion[edit]

I have deleted "This was due to a combination of factors that included the outlawing of the traditional Highland way of life following the Jacobite Rising of 1745, the infamous Highland Clearances and mass migration to urban areas during the Industrial Revolution." from the geography section. The deleted text attempts to explain the reason for the fall in population of the Highland area in the second half of the 19th century.

It has been deleted because:
The opinions are completely unreferenced.
What exactly does "outlawing the.....way of life" mean? In relation to any actual legislation, this is nonsense.
There is ample research (and citable sources, for instance[1]: xxiii, 414 and passim) to show that the Highland population was rising for most of the time of the clearances - reduction started in 1841 and continued for 160 years. However counter-intuitive it might appear, the greatest population falls in the Highlands occurred after the end of the clearances. So a brief mention of the Highland clearances, without any further explanation, is misleading as if furthers simplistic and erroneous assumptions.
Whilst it is true that many Highlanders migrated to the cities of Scotland, mentioning just this omits the large numbers of people who emigrated to Canada, the USA and Australia. Furthermore, what is meant by "mass" migration? Did everyone go all at the same time, or does this just signify a large number of people?
There is no mention of the Highland Potato Famine, so unbalancing the entire explanation.

I have not added any replacement text, as I am not sure that a historical account is rightfully placed in a geography section. (Yes, I am aware of the discipline of "historical geography".)
ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 08:07, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Richards, Eric (2000). The Highland Clearances People, Landlords and Rural Turmoil (2013 ed.). Edinburgh: Birlinn Limited. ISBN 978-1-78027-165-1.

Merge proposal[edit]

I propose that The Highland Council be merged into Highland (council area). I preciously suggested a merge with Politics of the Highland council area but withdrew this after consideration, as the wider and historical aspects justify two articles (in addition to the general Scottish Highlands article). However, these other two are basically synonyms covering the same topic of the extant local authority covering an area of low population. Only one is needed. Crowsus (talk) 19:22, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose This would be like merging the articles for the Scottish Government and Scotland. Kennethmac2000 (talk) 14:23, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Apples and oranges, you're equating a country of 5 million with a local authority of less than 5% of that. Scotland and the Scottish Government cover very different topics, while The Highland Council and Highland (council area) are overlapping to a high degree. What is there to say about the members and elections that can't be included in the geographical summary of the area? History doesn't come into it, as that is at Scottish Highlands, and wider political issues can be covered at Politics of the Highland council area. No other extant local authority, including Glasgow City and Edinburgh City, have separate articles for the current geographical entity and the political composition, nor do other historic entities which are now similarly named smaller council zones, such as Renfrewshire and Stirlingshire. Crowsus (talk) 00:29, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Highland isn't the only area for which we have separate articles on the council and its territory: a glance at Category:Local authorities of Scotland shows a few others. In fact the whole way we cover Scottish local authorities and their areas seems more inconsistent the more I look into it. I would rather if possible explore ways of producing more overall consistency rather than discussing an individual case here. Are there any relevant policies and guidelines that might help? --Deskford (talk) 23:26, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, you're not wrong. But I would say if anything that reinforces my argument, as a number of these (East Lothian Council, The Moray Council, Midlothian Council, Perth and Kinross Council and West Lothian Council) are stubs with basic information which could easily be incorporated into the geographical articles for the local authority areas. The Highland Council also falls under this definition, but to be fair it is by far the most developed of them. The presence of Aberdeen City Council, [The City of Edinburgh Council]], Falkirk Council, Fife Council, Stirling, Glasgow City Council, Comhairle nan Eilean Siar, Orkney Islands Council and Shetland Islands Council is fair enough, because in each case another main article covers their physical presence as it is the same as the modern council area. The other articles in the category are redirects because, guess what, a single article for the geography and politics of these small, recently formed entities suffices. If most of the local authorities in Scotland can survive on Wikipedia with an article on the historic place itself, one on overall politics, and one on both its modern council area and composition, I don't see why the Highlands and the other 'double' articles listed are needed, and for both consistency and ease of access for readers, they should be merged. I believe WP:OVERLAP is the guideline here, and I would also suggest that if it is deemed that the Highland article should be merged, that would create a sufficient precedent to do the same with the other (smaller) articles. Crowsus (talk) 00:41, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose They could be expanded in time. They much better with seperate article. They functionally different. scope_creepTalk 14:48, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I think there is a reasonable case for this merge. However, I think there is a stronger one for merging The Highland Council with Politics of the Highland council area, which seems to be an entirely redundant article. Robofish (talk) 18:31, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose this a bad idea.Catfurball (talk) 19:01, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the current proposal, on the grounds that the articles have a sufficiently distinct scope and the pattern of two pages matches the pattern set by other council areas in Scotland. Any such proposal should be an omnibus discussion involving those areas. However, I would support Robofish's suggestion of a merge between The Highland Council with Politics of the Highland council area, where these is stronger overlap of scope. Klbrain (talk) 12:29, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, on the basis there is a distinct difference between the geographical area of Highland and its local authority (history, politics, composition etc.). But as others have pointed out, there is a big overlap of information between The Highland Council and Politics of the Highland council area (the latter should give an overview, not go into detail) and there is plenty that could be merged there. Sionk (talk) 13:25, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Probably makes sense since its not likely there would be much that wouldn't also directly apply to the council area its self similar to districts in England but not counties. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:57, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]