Talk:Declaration of Calton Hill

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

Keep, 26 June 2023, see discussion.
keep, 5 July 2008, see discussion.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Politics of the United Kingdom

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles

??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

More information:
/
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Scotland Low‑importance

	Scotland portal This article 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.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cleanup of article

I've tagged this article today, because it generally needs some copyediting, to cure the redlinks and so forth that are present. Furthermore, the final section has inappropriate formatting and needs Wikifying better. Also, the page does not cite any sources and requires them, as not to infringe on Wikipedia's verifiability standards. I'll start work on this, but please feel free to contribute to improve the article as noted above. --M0RHI | Talk to me 13:40, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of this article

It is not very notable. It was drafted by a political party which currently have 1% of the popular vote according to opinion polls and was almost exclusively signed by their supporters. It was just another childish publicity stunt from the Scottish Socialist Party. They went for an easy headline by boycotting the visit of the queen and holding their own event. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.132.213.71 (talk • contribs)

Following on from my research, to satisfy the section above, I've added a notability tag to either encourage contributions, or to create debate on the worthiness of this article. My reasons are:

The signatories that I found on the 'petitiononline' website [1] amount to 654. This is very low. I'm sure there are many petitions for Scottish independence that are established that far exceed this. Although the subject was probably incredibly notable at the time (co-inciding with the visit of HM The Queen, it is maybe now lacking somewhat in notoriety.
Only two articles call this article, those being Calton Hill and Scottish independence

There either needs to be expansion of this article, in my opinion, to include the above-mentioned reference and sources, and particularly, its impact around the time, and continuing impact. Hopefully someone can save this article, else it could be better merged into Scottish independence. If not, it could sadly be the subject of an AfD. --M0RHI | Talk to me 13:53, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have searched The Guardian for mention of this, and linked the article. I think it is an important stage in the Independence movement and was surprised to find no article on the English wikipedia, so I created one. There is a small article on the Scots Wikipedia. I will work on this more soon.Boleslaw 17:24, 22 August 2006 (UTC)DB[reply]

OK, as I said, I'll try wikifying it in the near future, and try to find some sources and contributions towards it to solve the above. The work you're doing in the meantime is great. Most articles, as you'll know, start off with a myriad of tags they could be subjected to, but in time turn into good articles. Kind regards. M0RHI | Talk to me 17:49, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikisource

The primary problem with this article is that the full text of the declaration is given in a rather fugly and unwikified way. The solution then, surely, is to move the text of the declaration to Wikisource and link it? Cynical 22:55, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll agree with that. M0RHI | Talk to me 12:55, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]