|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
In Northern Ireland (Ulster)
"In Northern Ireland (Ulster), Americans of Scots-Irish descent ..." appears to equate Northern Ireland with Ulster. Not accurate, and poor usage.
Anyone for 'Famous Scots-Irish'? I am a modest representative of the type, and am opposed to list-making, but I'm much more certain that John C. Calhoun was Scots-Irish than that he was UU (and I'm sure that he'd be appalled to be connected with the list of princples on that page - he might have believed that everyone was going to heaven, but he sure didn't think he'd have to sit with them.) --MichaelTinkler
As a Scot, my grandparents often admonished well-meaning aquantances that Scotch was a whiskey and not a name for folks of Scottish heritage. Somehow, the US has used the word for everything from whiskey to butter-scotch candy, to Scotch-tape to hop-scotch. It is not, however, a term embraced by Scots worldwide. The term, Scot-free comes from the true designation of a Scottish citizen (although it has its roots in folklore that Scots are cheap, -also not embraced by Scots.) -SL —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 14:37, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Maybe someone could expand on useage notes. I would think there would be differences between useage in the USA vs. UK. Roodog2k 14:31 EDT, 11 AUG 2004
This is bad English, "The Scots-Irish ethnic group has a very strong tendency towards protestantism". A tendency towards Protestantism? The Scots-Irish were Presbyterians mostly in religion, although you could find some Anglicans, "Independents" and Quakers among them. The use of "tendency" I feel is facetious and sneering.
Anglican vs. Episcopalian
Anglicans in Ireland during the 17th century belonged to the Church of Ireland, which was at the time directly subject to the Church of England; nearly all Anglicans at that time were Anglo-Irish, or "New English" (as opposed to the "Old English", or Hiberno-Normans, such as the Burkes, Fitzgeralds, and Martins of Galway). The Scots whose practices and church polity were vitrually identical to that of COI and COE were Episcopalians, but these were not as yet part of the Anglican Communion, and did not become so until 1807. A major reason for this was the fact that the Scottish Episcopal Church was Non-juring and Jacobite before that year, with its members suffering under the same Penal Laws as Presbyterians, and even today maintains a separate presence in the province of Ulster.
Scots-Irish in US & Canada
There is no info on Canada in this section, why is Canada included in the title? Perhaps someone knowledgeable could add some information. Basser g 01:07, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
It's not true that most Scots-Irish were on the rebel side of the American Revolution. The Scots-Irish were evenly divided, especially in the Carolinas. 22.214.171.124 19:02, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Merge with Ulster-Scots
I am proposing that this article be merged with Ulster-Scots as they both deal with the same group of people, but under different names and from slightly different perspectives. However, I'd like to test the water first before putting any tamplates up. --sony-youthpléigh 20:51, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
- Good idea. Both articles are in need of attention and it would be good to pool the "good bits" of both and try to create something better. --John 21:04, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Speaking as one who is Scotch-Irish, I would not merge Scotch-Irish with Ulster-Scots. To me the two are very different. It would be like merging "Pennsylvania Dutch" with "German". To me, the term Scotch-Irish brings to mind images of log cabins in wooded mountain hollers, banjos and coon hounds, and has nothing to do with Lambeg drums, the color orange or kings named Billy.
Scotch-Irish is an American term (I don't know if it's used in Canada), and refers to immigrants to the American colonies from the Ulster area in the 17th and 18th centuries, and to their descendants. Ulster-Scots seems to be immigrants to Ireland from Scotland, and their descendants still living in Ireland. Maybe the two were related once, but it was a few hundred years ago.
And the term is Scotch-Irish, not Scots-Irish. I do not like it when people try to tell me what I should call myself. My Dad died a couple of months ago and I wrote "Scotch-Irish" on the forms I had to fill out. When I got the death certificate back, some bureaucrat had changed it to "Scottish/Irish". I can hear my Dad grumbling still.--Eastcote (talk) 04:00, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, good idea, then disambiguate "Scots-Irish" to "Scots-Irish American" and "Ulster Scots"? --sony-youthpléigh 13:15, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
- There's no such thing as Scottish-Irish (someone born in Scotland, who becomes an Irish citizen)? GoodDay 23:42, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
I agree there should be a single article for Scotch-Irish. I'd prefer simply "Scotch-Irish", but you can call it "Scotch-Irish American" if you want, but please don't call it "Scots-Irish". That's like finger nails on a blackboard to me.--Eastcote (talk) 03:42, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for suggesting removal of this phony non-article. Anyone with an English dictionary can see that those are not the definitions of those terms. I'm doing this in conjunction with the request for a rewrite I placed on Ulster Scots People. There is not and never has been an Ulster Scots People, only speakers of Ulster Scots dialects. The editors above say banners have been placed. They must have been taken down as I don't see them. We are dealing with editors determined to foist a partisan view of history off as historical fact. I don't think we can let this go by. I've chosen the soft option of demanding revision. We may be in for battle. I can always join you later in putting up deletion requests if the editors refuse to come up with documented material. We aren't or should not be making up history here, even though many partisans have done it.Botteville (talk) 15:51, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
The current version is not according to standard English. I therefore put the standard definitions in. These were reverted by Lunker with the reason given that I need consensus. It seems a bit strange to me that correct standard English requires a consensus, but the articles to which this disambig refer adopt a non-standard and unusual view, that Scotch-Irish refers to Ulster Scots. This is clearly wrong, and is not justified by the references (or lack of them) given in those articles. However, I cannot address the issue here because this is only a disambig and does not allow references. The place to address it is in those other articles. This appears to be a longer-term project for me and unless I misjudge we are going battle it out point by point. Truth I suppose is worth it. Once those articles are correct and unbiased, decisions with regard to this disambig should be manifest. However, let's not pre-judge the situation. Once I start a thorough research, I don't know what I shall find. Maybe in some parts of the British Isles Scotch-Irish does mean the Scottish immigrants to northern Ireland. In that case, maybe we need two definitions. Of one thing I am sure as a native English speaker, American Scotch-Irish does NOT mean Ulstermen. I notice right away that the Ulster Scots People article begins with non-encyclopedic references. Well, but let's not get ahead of ourselves.Also, I'm a slow worker and I have a few other things on my agenda. It appears that the article can be considered sequentially so I don't see any rush. A couple of points, Lunker, we should establish. We both know we need reasons for changes or reversions. Second, I can delete unreferenced material without a consensus. Third, if I find other referenced material expressing a different view, I can put it in. Typically though I will try to flag my intent with a tag. Well I need to break now and I need to split my time but I will begin work as soon as I can.Botteville (talk) 21:17, 23 January 2016 (UTC)