Template talk:History of Scotland

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Scotland (Rated NA-class)
WikiProject icon This template is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 NA  This template does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject History (Rated Template-class)
WikiProject icon This template is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 Template  This template does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 

Observations[edit]

Some observations on this template. Is the word Chronologicy actually an English word? Using aggregator dictionaries/reference sites I've only found the word used in wikipedia Scottish articles and WP's mirror sites , and one use in French and one in German. Online Oxford and Cambridge dictionaries fail to locate the word. There are other words such as chronography or chronology that could be used. The title of the template makes it clear its about Scotland so shouldn't the list be consistant and omit the adjective Scottish i.e. why Scottish Reformation, Scottish Enlightenment, Timeline of Scottish history, Wars of Scottish Independence, Scottish colonization of the Americas, Scottish devolution, Scotland national football team, Natural history of Scotland when we already only use terms such as Prehistoric (timeline), During the Roman Empire, Early Middle Ages, High Middle Ages without dropping in Scotland/Scottish. --Bill Reid | (talk) 17:33, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Agreed all round. Chronologicy does not exist on Wiktionary either. Ben MacDui 18:00, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Also agreed on those points. We could use the simple "Eras", or something similar, in place of Chronologicy.--SabreBD (talk) 08:20, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I think Eras works if, say, events such as Reformation and Enlightenment and Wars of independence which took place within a relatively short timescale were moved to the Topics section, and also Natural History re-positioned to immediately after Historiographical perspectives as a tidy up. --Bill Reid | (talk) 16:02, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
I can see the logic of where the topics are at the moment, but I guess a move is inevitable as this sort of article will tend to increase. I should also add that where possible we might remove "Scottish" from the headings, as that is implicit like history, as in "Scottish Reformation", its unlikely to be a general article. The template is very long and it could probably benefit from the shortening (even marginal) that these edits would produce.--SabreBD (talk) 09:01, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Changed template according to above discussion to see how it looks. Anyone see any problems? --Bill Reid | (talk) 15:45, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Definitely an improvement, but I did a little more pruning. I am happy for this to be reverted if anyone feels it loses the meaning.--SabreBD (talk) 18:21, 2 December 2011 (UTC)