Talk:Burghead

Untitled edit

Latest comment: 17 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

This article is just a lift from this web site [1] and breaches someones copyright. --Bill Reid | Talk 10:10, 9 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

You're right about it being copied Bill, but it may have come from this. Not sure which is the older. Anyway, I've removed the section on the Clavie. Well spotted! Cheers, Angus McLellan (Talk) 10:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

The Well section was also taken from here:[2]. so I've removed it. --Bill Reid | Talk 10:06, 10 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Gregorian calendar edit

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Seems to be a common misconception that Scotland adopted the Gregorian calendar in 1600. It didn't but did make 1 January 1600 its new years day. England held on to the 25 March for its new years day until 1753. Wonder why James VI didn't get this changed when he went down South? --Bill Reid | Talk 14:23, 17 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Highland railway edit

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I would be grateful if someone could add information about the old Hopeman branch railway line and stations. I found some information here, but as I do not much about the subject I thought it would be better for someone else to add the information to the article, preferably with a map. --Darryl.matheson | Talk 22:51, 5 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Large Factory edit

Latest comment: 11 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

I have been frequenting the Findhorn area for many many years now and have been to Cummingston several times, however, I have never been able to find out what the large grey/white factory type building in Burghead is. It's visible for ages along the coastline but I couldn't find any information about what it is. Can anyone she some light on the subject for me? Some photographs of the structure would also be good.

--Inafinus | Talk 19:55, 12 November 2008 (UTC) For info: Brief Summary of Burgheasd Maltings http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=%Picture - Burghead MaltingsReply

Time2waste (talk) 16:22, 11 July 2012 (UTC)Reply

It seems to be the Maltings <http://www.google.com.au/imgres?hl=en&sa=X&biw=1189&bih=819&tbm=isch&prmd=imvns&tbnid=fzzkduBM_WiHbM:&imgrefurl=http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/579454&docid=nxO0MRZ9eWxFMM&imgurl=http://s0.geograph.org.uk/photos/57/94/579454_01e7e657.jpg&w=640&h=378&ei=ccoAUKu-MKmtiAfu9emBCA&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=122&vpy=284&dur=21133&hovh=172&hovw=292&tx=126&ty=194&sig=103725445188980230021&page=2&tbnh=147&tbnw=216&start=20&ndsp=25&ved=1t:429,r:15,s:20,i:187> --Wikiain (talk) 01:30, 14 July 2012 (UTC)Reply

Burning of the Clavie: date edit

Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Part of the section "Burning of the Clavie" currently reads, I think rather obscurely:

In 1599, the Parliament of Scotland passed a law under James VI to make 1 January the official New Year's Day and that the year 1600 would be the first time of its use but kept the Julian calendar. Britain adopted the Gregorian calendar in 1752 when the day following 2 September was 14 September. The 'Auld Yuil' [al il] (Old Yule) was therefore celebrated 12 days after 1 January and the Clavie burning was on the eve of the new year.[9] On 20 January 1689 the young men of the village were rebuked by the church courts for "having made a burning clavie, paying it superstitious worship, and blessing the boats after the old heathen custom."[10] The tradition nonetheless survives.

I propose instead:

In 1599 the Parliament of Scotland passed a law which, while retaining the Julian calendar, provided that, beginning in 1600, the first day of the year would be 1 January. In 1752 Great Britain, including Scotland, adopted the Gregorian calendar, removing 11 days from the calendar by stipulating that the day following 2 September would be not 3 September but 14 September. The day that would have been New Year's Day in the old calendar now fell on 12 January of the new calendar. The Burning of the Clavie continues to be celebrated on the former New Year's Eve—that is, in the new calendar, on 11 January.

The practice has survived clerical condemnation. On 20 January 1689 (Old Style) the young men of the village were rebuked by the church courts for "having made a burning clavie, paying it superstitious worship, and blessing the boats after the old heathen custom."[10]

I've removed the references to "Auld Yuil": to the best of my knowledge, "Yuil (Yule)" is Christmas (see Christmas in Scotland), while New Year's Eve is Hogmanay.

The second paragraph, as I propose to make it, might be expanded by tracing the origins, or possible origins, of the practice in the area's Pictish and/or Viking heritage. I assume that the date 20 January 1689 is Old Style: perhaps someone could check in Sellar. It may be relevant to note that tar barrelling was banned elsewhere in Scotland, or at least in the Shetlands, during the 19th century: see Up Helly Aa. --Wikiain (talk) 02:35, 18 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

There having been no comments, I've made that proposed change. Except that I haven't specified the date 20 January 1689 as Old Style or New Style, leaving it as presumptively New Style. (Compliments of the Season to all!) --Wikiain (talk) 23:19, 27 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Burning of the Clavie: practice edit

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Part of the section "Burning of the Clavie" reads:

The Clavie is a barrel which is cut down to 17 inches, which is filled with tar and bits of wood. It is nailed onto a pole [which is 4 foot 6 inches long] with a specially forged nail. It has to be specially made to leave a space for the carrier’s head to fit between the staves [6 in all] and allowing him to rest it partly on his shoulders while he carries it.

Could somebody please clarify this? I am baffled as to what this special nail looks like and does. --Wikiain (talk) 02:42, 18 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Assessment comment edit

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Burghead/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

This article has been slowly improving - here are a few stylistic suggestions. There is no need to put 'click to enlarge' on images, and thumbs do not need a px sizing per WP:PIC. The lead para needs attention per WP:LEAD and the reference styles do not conform to WP:MOS. There are a few places where the language is in need of attention e.g. 'Interesting Facts'. The demography section is very detailed - good work. Ben MacDui (Talk) 08:39, 12 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Last edited at 01:42, 23 September 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 10:32, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified edit

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on Burghead. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:13, 10 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Burghead. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:10, 27 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Burghead. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:25, 4 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Merger proposal edit

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I propose that Burning of the Clavie be merged into Burghead. It is largely a duplicate of a section already in the Burghead article. It has duplications within itself, between the text and the image captions. The first image is nearly the same as the second, the second is already in the Burghead article (and I would prefer it), and the third can be used in the Burghead article. Given the extent of duplication, merger seems unlikely to require a substantial expansion of the Burghead article's section. Wikiain (talk) 23:12, 29 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Add topic