This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Tawse article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I noticed this article does not have a photo so I asked my friend if I could photograph his fine specimen of a tawse and added it to the Commons as public domain. Kit 07:14, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Please remember, when editing the article, that it needs to be encyclopedic in tone, neutral in point of view, and sourced and verifiable where possible. Salivating description of 'terrifying thrashings' might be fine on a S&M website, but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia.
I support the cuts you have recently made to this article. Kit O'Connell ( Todfox: user / talk / contribs) 09:40, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
I never heard it called a 'tawse" till late in my life; during my childhood it was " the belt" or "the scud" to pupils, and just "the belt" to teachers.
So how universal was the word "tawse"?
Certainly it was not so in central Scotland during the 1960's, and I speak as one with considerable experience of its use (from the receiving end). :D
. Side on or face on? 81.145.242.57 21:30, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Just an additional point, at my school we called it the "Lochgelly Welly", if there is any evidence that was a common reference, perhaps thats worth adding to the article.
This article has been selectively edited by someone who is attempting to change history.
As the author, I own the copyright, and have supplied my original article in good faith. As a descendant of Mr Philp, I have the family papers and I believe I am well placed to be able to supply some facts here, to augment a very selective and misleading text.
Deleting factual material reflects extremely badly on the whole of Wikipedia which should be an open source resource, not propaganda!
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.219.117.5 ( talk) 18:15, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
The tawse is a form of corporal punishment, which may be regarded by some as child abuse but is not by others. To unequivocally categorise it as such would be to promote one point of view over another (see WP:NPOV), though putting this in a "see also" section would not. Mutt Lunker ( talk) 17:46, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
It's very confusing to see an article about British schools with content like the following: "Scottish public (state) schools…". State schools are definitely not public schools in Scotland or the rest of the U.K. (if it is felt necessary to explain what sort of school a U.K. state school is, why not link straight to the article on the subject?), so I'm not certain that the "clarification" actually adds anything. It seems cumbersome to separate out the schools anyway, because it offers no information on state schools which didn't use the strap; perhapsit could be rendered along the lines of: "The tawse was used in both the state and public school systems, although some chose other methods of punishment." Jock123 ( talk) 23:05, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
Per above, the article is historical and if the term has lost currency in modern times, it is the correct term in the context of the article, per WP:ENGVAR and utterly clear and ambiguous with the qualification in brackets saying "(state)". Enlightening people with a historically correct term adds to the article and is perfectly clear with the qualification given. Removing it impoverishes the article. Usage of the terms "public" and "private" in Scotland and England for independent/fee-paying schools is very, very different; you are quite wrong here. The former term is rare and largely avoided in Scotland for such schools because of the potential (almost inevitable I'd say) confusion and the latter is just not really used in England, where "public" or "independent" would be the terms. The citations using the word "state" tell us nothing as the usage of this term is not in question; the misapprehension that "public" should be removed as incorrect is the issue. Mutt Lunker ( talk) 00:08, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Tawse article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I noticed this article does not have a photo so I asked my friend if I could photograph his fine specimen of a tawse and added it to the Commons as public domain. Kit 07:14, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Please remember, when editing the article, that it needs to be encyclopedic in tone, neutral in point of view, and sourced and verifiable where possible. Salivating description of 'terrifying thrashings' might be fine on a S&M website, but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia.
I support the cuts you have recently made to this article. Kit O'Connell ( Todfox: user / talk / contribs) 09:40, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
I never heard it called a 'tawse" till late in my life; during my childhood it was " the belt" or "the scud" to pupils, and just "the belt" to teachers.
So how universal was the word "tawse"?
Certainly it was not so in central Scotland during the 1960's, and I speak as one with considerable experience of its use (from the receiving end). :D
. Side on or face on? 81.145.242.57 21:30, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Just an additional point, at my school we called it the "Lochgelly Welly", if there is any evidence that was a common reference, perhaps thats worth adding to the article.
This article has been selectively edited by someone who is attempting to change history.
As the author, I own the copyright, and have supplied my original article in good faith. As a descendant of Mr Philp, I have the family papers and I believe I am well placed to be able to supply some facts here, to augment a very selective and misleading text.
Deleting factual material reflects extremely badly on the whole of Wikipedia which should be an open source resource, not propaganda!
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.219.117.5 ( talk) 18:15, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
The tawse is a form of corporal punishment, which may be regarded by some as child abuse but is not by others. To unequivocally categorise it as such would be to promote one point of view over another (see WP:NPOV), though putting this in a "see also" section would not. Mutt Lunker ( talk) 17:46, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
It's very confusing to see an article about British schools with content like the following: "Scottish public (state) schools…". State schools are definitely not public schools in Scotland or the rest of the U.K. (if it is felt necessary to explain what sort of school a U.K. state school is, why not link straight to the article on the subject?), so I'm not certain that the "clarification" actually adds anything. It seems cumbersome to separate out the schools anyway, because it offers no information on state schools which didn't use the strap; perhapsit could be rendered along the lines of: "The tawse was used in both the state and public school systems, although some chose other methods of punishment." Jock123 ( talk) 23:05, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
Per above, the article is historical and if the term has lost currency in modern times, it is the correct term in the context of the article, per WP:ENGVAR and utterly clear and ambiguous with the qualification in brackets saying "(state)". Enlightening people with a historically correct term adds to the article and is perfectly clear with the qualification given. Removing it impoverishes the article. Usage of the terms "public" and "private" in Scotland and England for independent/fee-paying schools is very, very different; you are quite wrong here. The former term is rare and largely avoided in Scotland for such schools because of the potential (almost inevitable I'd say) confusion and the latter is just not really used in England, where "public" or "independent" would be the terms. The citations using the word "state" tell us nothing as the usage of this term is not in question; the misapprehension that "public" should be removed as incorrect is the issue. Mutt Lunker ( talk) 00:08, 23 December 2013 (UTC)