Talk:Skalk

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.

Spirits Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spirits, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spirits or Distilled beverages 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.SpiritsWikipedia:WikiProject SpiritsTemplate:WikiProject SpiritsSpirits articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Spirits WikiProject task list:

This list is transcluded from the tasks page, to edit it click here.

Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Spirits:

Tagging all articles that fall under our scope with {{WikiProject Spirits}} and assessing their quality and importance to the project.

Scottish Islands Low‑importance

	Scottish islands portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scottish Islands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of islands in Scotland 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.Scottish IslandsWikipedia:WikiProject Scottish IslandsTemplate:WikiProject Scottish IslandsScottish Islands articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

PROD reasoning

I would question the current reasoning for a PROD in that it is not difficult to find ghits, particularly if the search for "skalk" is paired with "Johnson" and/or "whisky". This article on the Scotch Malt Whisky Society site discusses the term authoritatively. It is clearly not a neoligism, particularly if Johnson remarked on it in the 1770s. Is it more than a dictionary entry though? Mutt Lunker (talk) 14:27, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I did try to verify if that quote was legitimate, but I couldn't find it immediately. I was in error. --Nick Penguin_(contribs) 02:05, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]