Talk:Kailyard school

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.

Literature Low‑importance

	Literature portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature 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.LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureTemplate:WikiProject LiteratureLiterature articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Stub?

I am not sure if I fully understand "stubs". This link seems to be fully fleshed out as it is. While I am not intimately familiar with Scottish literature, I fully understood what Kailyard school writing was from this article. Autkm 03:33, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More could be added. For instance no titles of kailyard books have been given, despite the fact that the authors mentioned created both kailyard and non-kailyard works. Also the best known anti-kailyard novel The House with the Green Shutters has not been mentioned. -- Derek Ross | Talk 00:14, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Additional sources

Ran across this one:

Nash, Andrew (2007). "Kailyard: Problem or Illusion?". In Manning, Susan; Brown, Ian; Clancy, Thomas; Pittock, Murray (eds.). Edinburgh History of Scottish Literature. Vol. 2: Enlightenment, Britain and Empire (1707–1918). Edinburgh University Press. pp. 317–323. doi:10.3366/j.ctt1g09x78. ISBN 9780748624812. – This is a very expensive academic volume.

— SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 22:40, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Clydesideism (Clydsidism) - a related, mostly filmic, trope

FYI

– Pointer to relevant discussion elsewhere.

We don't have an article on this presently, but it is described along with tartanry and kailyard as one of the three leading stereotyping media tropes about Scotland. I've opened a thread about it here: Talk:Tartanry#Clydesideism. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 22:42, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 22 July 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Rough consensus that the current title is the WP:COMMONNAME; consequently, participants found "Kailyard school" to be the most appropriate title regardless of whether the article topic is a school of literature per se. (closed by non-admin page mover) ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 14:38, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kailyard school → Kailyard literature – Our article opens by basically disputing that this is in fact a "school" of literature rather than just a genre, and the literary-critical views on the topic are clearly divided, so WP should not be pre-emptively declaring it a "school" in the article title, especially since "kailyard literature" is entirely descriptive enough and otherwise adequate as a title. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 09:52, 22 July 2023 (UTC)— Relisting. —usernamekiran (talk) 16:48, 7 August 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} 19:12, 16 August 2023 (UTC)— Relisting. —usernamekiran (talk) 22:10, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tentative oppose but suggest refactoring the lede to be extremely blunt that this was a term used by critics, not a real "school" or movement. It seems there are some quotes that explicitly use the word "school", so probably best to keep it, just clarify that it wasn't really a school despite being called one. (In the same way that cosy catastrophe is used outright, despite not being a term used by writers, and being a quite misleading and incorrect term in its original target of Day of the Trifflids.) SnowFire (talk) 21:19, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Edit: I took a shot at this here, feel free to further edit. SnowFire (talk) 21:56, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  I'm not suggesting that "school" be removed from the article; of course the term should be included as a term that critics of the genre use; it just shouldn't be one-sidedly endorsed by Wikipedia, through using it as the article title. If anything, your revision would seem to suggest even more strongly changing the article title. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 03:52, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  
  Ping: SnowFire — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 10:59, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  - Checking ngrams... hmm, "kailyard literature" doesn't come up at all. I suppose it could be a descriptive title, but I'm not sure if it's any less non-neutral than "kailyard school." Might as well use the term the sources do in this case IMO? SnowFire (talk) 15:09, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, it's a descriptive title, and you must not be doing the ngrams correctly [1]. I do not understand what you mean by "I'm not sure if it's any less non-neutral". There is no NPOV issue with "Kailyard literature", since there is no viewpoint against the idea that it's literature or that it's called Kailyard; but there is a strong pair of PoVs pro and con that idea that it forms a "school" of literature. Frankly, I'm finding it rather baffling that this RM has aroused any opposition at all. The short fact of the matter is that WP is not in a position to "settle" a real-world source dispute by picking a side in our article title. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 11:17, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Query How much of a "dispute" actually is there? I don't know anything about the topic but reading the article on its face only Andrew Nash appears to have challenged it. The wording says "critics such as Andrew Nash..." but that's cited to only Nash so i don't know whether or not expanding it beyond him was atouch of WP:OR. DeCausa (talk) 11:34, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There's no page reference for Nash. I searched "school" in it and scanning the results from the 200+ page book a discussion of whether it was one or not didn't jump out - which is not to say it's not there for sure. DeCausa (talk) 11:51, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Scotland has been notified of this discussion. CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} 19:13, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Literature has been notified of this discussion. CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} 19:13, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. The current term is the one that's employed for the subject. It being an actual school or not is not pertinent in that regard. There is even less of a connection to cruciferous vegetables but we're surely not going to drop "kailyard". Those are the terms in the subject's name.

For what it's worth "'KAILYARD' SCHOOL" is the article title in Collins Encyclopaedia of Scotland. Mutt Lunker (talk) 23:43, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.