To discuss article changes, please use:
If you see comments on this page, they remain for archive purposes.
The United Kingdom of Great Britain
- moved from User talk:Scarecroe
I just noticed you changed the Croebot so that "British" in all cases now directs to the United Kingdom. Again, this isn't accurate. It's a stylistic thing for me, I like the phrase "British actor," but if it really bothers you, please replace with English actor. Don't redirect to the UK. I know that while English actors are always British, one can technically be a British actor (or citizen) without being English. But that's *never* how I've used it. If they're Scottish or Welsh or whatever, I've always specified. I was going to let it drop after the Wilson thing, since it feels like you and I have had too many silly arguments lately, but then I noticed the changes. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 19:10, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- We've gone over this before. Regardless of how you'd like to use the term, being British does not mean that someone is English, which is what all those links previously implied before I changed them. It would be like saying "Andrew Leal is a North American student." I'll gladly change the links, but at this point, I don't know which individuals are British and which are more accurately English. Can you make a list? —Scott (talk) 19:17, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- I don't need to make a list. If it says British, it means English. If it doesn't, it doesn't (like Jonathan Pryce, I specify he's Welsh). Wikipedia used British as the source of many of these, and the phrase is quite common. So please, do fix. There's a few cases for non-people articles (like Mystery! or Spotted Dick) where it could go either way, so a UK link seems fair in those cases. But again, I wish you'd discussed it with me before the change; if you didn't understand how I (and also Danny) was using it, I could have quickly explained. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 19:20, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- See, that's the problem: "If it says British, it means English." I don't know how I can make it more clear that such a statement is inaccurate and potentially offensive.
- Anyway, are you certain all the people whose pages were changed by croebot are indeed English and not Scottish, Irish or Welsh? If that's the case, I'll change the phrase and the link to both English next time I can access the computer I use to run the bot. —Scott (talk) 19:25, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- I always checked before I added it (and if Danny added it first, I checked too). Wikipedia and cinema books use the phrase all the time, but I'm too tired and wishing I was dead again to argue about the phrase, since English actor works fine, but the current linking system is just as inaccurate. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 19:31, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Emma chimed in here regarding her confusion of the linking and she's from there. As far as accurancy, our article for United Kingdom is just short for United Kingdom of Great Britain. I don't know who else is from there, but people from there would be good to hear from. —Scott (talk) 19:43, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Well I'am not from the UK but I do know that most people from Scotland would take it as an insult to call them English. So unless its sure that a person is from England, then the term English should not be used. Henrik 21:36, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Okay, I'm feeling a little better now (been very much under the weather, plus school stress). I left a note with Emma, but it's clear to me that she wasn't complaining about the linking, but why the term had been changed from British to English. Scott, let me clarify. You took offense to "If it says British, it means English." I'm not saying that as a definition of the term, I'm saying that's how Danny and I have been using it when describing actors, that that's how I've always used it on the Wiki in this sense. I always check and note when their Scottish or Welsh or what have you. It's not at all inaccurate to call an English actor British, since they are, but it's also not mandatory if it poses a problem. I can see how it might throw you at first (some news articles will call Peter O'Toole "British" since he's not English, but for whatever reason, they don't want to call him Irish), which is why I feel the link change was inaccurate. Because the link was done in a deliberately, specific way. We'll see if Emma or others chime in, but there's two solutions. Fix the link and change to the term English, or remove all linking (which isn't used on all pages anyway) and keep the terminology as is. Linking British to UK is not necessarily false, but seems to imply we don't know exactly where in the United Kingdom they're from. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 00:18, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- Well I don't mean to cause offence. But I don't think it's right to just assume "British"="English". It is inaccurate. As far as I'm concerned British directed to United Kingdom is ok in most cases (although there are a few instances where it wouldn't work). I think it's fine to call people British be they English, Scottish, Welsh or Irish from Northern Ireland/Ulster (but not from Southern Ireland/Eire - in which case they must definitely be defined as Irish). Irish is the one that is a bit of a debateable matter. For example Sean Connery may be Scottish but he is also a British Actor.
- To me defining someone as "Scottish", "Welsh" or "English" rather than British, is like in the US defining someone as Texan rather than American. (I use Texas as the example here because of it having at times been independent of both the US and Mexico).
- Generally I would go for the word "British" (that being a person's nationality, for example passports work permits etc), but in the persons entry we might also further specify specifically where in the UK they come from, if we know, and if it seems relevant to say so. However, I am in favour of removing the linking. It appears to me rather unecessary. For example we might say
- "Mak Wilson is a British puppeteer from Shropshire in England"
- Or another example
- "Mike Quinn is a British puppeteer from England"
- I very much like the phrase "British Actor" too; but I don't think the linking is necessary.
- I hope that helps Emma 10:40, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, Emma. That's a big help actually. So, for argument's sake, if we were to link to a country of origin, we could at least say that "Mak Wilson is a British puppeteer from England." You're saying that would be equivalent to, "Stepahnie D'Abruzzo is an American puppeteer and actress from Pennsylvania." Or, conversely, we can just say they're British without linking at all. I just think that saying someone is British and linking "British" to England is just as misleading to readers as saying (to use your example) that someone is American and linking "American" to Pennsylvania. I think we can be more coherant than that, or, as you said, not bother to be as detailed. I'm fine with either way. —Scott (talk) 15:18, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
- Either works for me too. So right now, I'd say the best thing would be to remove the links (replacing with blank text British. Like I said, I really don't like the current linking system, and then it's easier to clarify on a case by case basis (or, really, replace it all with a "British actor from England" right now, but I say case by case not because I'm not sure, I'd researched, but for how it sounds; I'm struggling with the niceties of language on my dossier still, but). -- Andrew Leal (talk) 21:04, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- I'm from the UK, and if your British you could be from England, Wales Scotland or Northern Ireland. Personally, " some ones name is a British actor from England seems a bit, well crude, i'm not sure of the right word but, maybe you should just say what country the are from... -- Joe (talk) 09:45, 17 August 2009 (UTC)