Talk:British West Indies/Archive 1

Archive 1

Is the term really used?

It may be used in some of the islands themselves, and in North America, but certainly isn't used in the UK. As for "Royal West Indies"? I've never heard that term before - indeed, as all but three former British colonies in the region still have the Queen as head of state, they could be described as 'Royal' too.

Quiensabe 17 February 2006 20;16 UTC

The people in the Turks and Caicos islands, made that name up and have been throwing that name around. Try to google "Royal West Indies" and "Turks and Caicos" you can still get a lot of hits. CaribDigita 20:31, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

In my opinion yes it is used - I live in the UK, albeit with Caribbean relatives. B.W.I is even put on the address.

Indies = Island?

What is this supposed to mean?

Although the word "Indies" was a reference to the word island ...

I have never before seen it said that "Indies" refers specifically to islands. Acsenray 16:38, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Good point. Fixed. Guettarda 16:43, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Which is more common?

The way this article is currently structured, it gives the impression that the term "British West Indies" refers to the British Overseas Territories in the Caribbean, which excludes most of the English-speaking Caribbean today. But what's the source for this? A search at dictionary.com gives two meanings:

a term formerly used for the possessions of Great Britain in the West Indies. Compare West Indies (def. 2).

and

The islands of the West Indies that were formerly under British control, including Jamaica, Barbados, Trinidad, Grenada, Antigua, St. Lucia, and the Bahamas.

(Askoxford.com gives nothing.)

Firstly, neither of these supports what is currently said. Secondly, the two aren't incompatible (despite appearances of such). The first definition doesn't say what it is used for now, but the second is quite clear (although they bizarrely exclude St. Vincent and the Grenadines >_>). The use I'm used to is a mixture of these two, namely that it's the name for the countries in the West Indies that speak English, both those that are still controlled by Britain and those that were controlled for long enough for it to be the primary language there.

Any thoughts? ~ Hairouna 20:39, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Just a thought but usually a country upon independence is no longer refered to as "British"... e.g. Canada is no longer called "British North America". One of the only spots that is independent of the UK today and still calls itself "British" is "British Colombia". CaribDigita 23:34, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

asfhjk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.16.57.227 (talk) 11:49, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Corrections

I made several corrections to this article. (1) "British West Indies" is definitely a historical term. A Google book search [1] and Google scholar search [2] enough to demonstrate that. (2) for the same reason, it is not the case that the British Overseas Territories in the Caribbean are "still in" the BWI. (3) Bermuda is not in the West Indies and it was never a part of the BWI. The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick ^t 02:31, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

However the list was arranged, removing the entire list was non-productive. I've restored it, but changed "are part of" to "were part of", as that appears to be what you're objecting to, since it's not very clear above. If this is still not acceptable, please don't delete the ENIRE ;list again, but dicsuss it here first. I'm also not sure the "Fraudulent document" section belongs here, but I won't delete the whole thing jhust yet. It's probably better covered as part of another article such as Camouflage passport, though that article has many problems itself. - BilCat (talk) 22:28, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

The list is a repitition of what appears in the prose (post my edits: read them before bandying about claims of unproductivity - which is not assuming good faith, btw). Replacing lists with prose is what all good articles should do. There is absolutely no need for a list here. The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick ^t,

The list has been in the article for several years, and I see no reason it should not be retained. Your previous comments didn't even mention the list as such, so I'm not sure how you think I was not assuming good faith - I didn't call it vandalism, and didn't think it was, just not a good idea. - BilCat (talk) 23:00, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I believe the list is useful, however it is arranged. Yes, they are covered in the history section, but not alphabetically, and not in a format that is is easy to spot. As such, I don't believe the list is redundant. - BilCat (talk) 23:15, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Some points:

• per the source I added, the British West Indies included for administrative purposes Guiana and British Honduras
• bandying around the word "unproductive", twice, is not assuming good faith.
• the fact that the list has been around for years is utterly irrelevant.
• I'm not sure whether you've taken an article to FA status, but please read this Wikipedia:Featured article advice "Beyond grammar issues, one of the most common deficiencies in articles that are created on Wikipedia is that they have short, one- and two-sentence paragraphs, or sections that are little better than lists. These break up the prose, interrupt the reader's flow, and result in a fragmented visual appearance."
• this "anglophone" distinction is as far as I can see totally unsourced.

I will write a paragraph to replace this list. The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick ^t 23:25, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

The fact you've done FAs is no reason to be a complete jerk, much less outright lie about what I've said when the truth is right here. It's obvious you think you own the article as your're not even attempting to have a discussion, much less a civil one. I'm through here. - BilCat (talk) 00:03, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Anyone who goes around accusing established editors of being "unproductive" is being a complete jerk in my book. The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick ^t 00:07, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

On second thoughts, I was being a jerk. Apologies, I overreacted to that word after a long day at work.... The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick ^t 00:13, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Apology accepted, and I've struck out my own over-reaction. The staight list bey alpha order is fine. The history section is broken down by regions, so that should suffice to render more info of location. - BilCat (talk) 02:26, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Bermuda

Where are the sources that state that Bermuda is, or ever has been, part of the British West Indies? It is in the Atlantic Ocean, not in (or even close to) the Caribbean. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:03, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

See, West Indies:ISLAND GROUP, ATLANTIC OCEAN: "Bermuda, although physiographically not a part of the West Indies, has common historical and cultural ties with the other islands and is often included in definitions of the region." Alanscottwalker (talk) 19:11, 1 February 2020 (UTC)