" 

 == The Sun == 

 Has anyone read the criticism of the Scottish language page in today's Scottish sun? Any thoughts?   

 :Nope (to both). However I always think it funny the way that News Corp will say one thing about a Scottish issue in the English edition of The Sun and the complete opposite in the Scottish edition. Once you've seen that happen a couple of times, you get the impression that whole paper is just a wind-up. Is this one of those cases ?   |   
 It may be Derek,but it happens too often in my opinion to be just a wind-up.I know of an English reporter,whose name eludes me,who criticises Scotland at every opportunity and would of course never be let near the Scottish edition.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by   •    

 :South of the border (haha) the Sun is generally regarded as a bit of a joke, i wouldn't read too much into it.    

 ::Exactly my thoughts, . It's a comic for grown-ups. Perhaps this is one case where Scots and English can agree!   |   

 I agree with you,it is just a comic,but you would be amazed (or maybe not) how many people believe the rubbish in this paper if it's repeated enough!   

 == Created ""Cromarty fisher dialect article == 

 I have just created an article on Cromarty fisher dialect and it currently doesn't have anything linking to it. If people have ideas on the best places to link the article, that would be great.    

 == Southern Extent of Scots == 

 The Article included this spurious claim: ...but arguably upto 2.5 million speakers throughout Northumberland, County Durham and Tyne and Wear. I have added a referenced bit about the southern extent of Scots to the section Dialects. If anyone can find equally reputable sources for the claim above feel free to reinstate it. I eagerly look forward to the references;-)    

 :Good work, Nogger!   |   

 :: http://www.indigogroup.co.uk/durhamdialect/sunderlandc19-1.htm    

 :::Most of those are still in use now.    

 No comments? You've got the F.E.A.R.    

 == Status and NPOV phrasing == 

 The status of Scots as a language in the sense one treats Swedish and Danish as languages can be justifyably questioned. See Ausbausprache - Abstandsprache - Dachsprache. Just because the British government now recognises Scots as a regional language under the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages does not automatically make it a language according to all paradigms. It is a political decision. If the Government declared the moon to be made of cheese it would not necessarily make it true. Governments across the world are known to create facts that fit their agendas.  

 Thus using Scots is an Anglic language descended from early northern Middle English... in the introduction pre-empts the discussion of its status in the next paragraph and in the section Status. The article should present and describe the (sourced) reasons why some linguists treat Scots as dialects of English and others as a separate language, why activists consider it a language and on what basis the British government decided to recognise it as one. This should be done neutrally leaving the reader to make their own decision based on the information presented. Yes, Scots language may be the title of the article. On one hand that has to do with Wikipedia naming policy, on the other we can simply accept this use of language to