Talk:Glossary of bagpipe terms

Circular definition of crunluath

The definition of crunluath says it is a sequence of crunluath. This is obviously a circular definition and of no use to anyone who doesn't already know what a crunluath is. 62.235.147.19 (talk) 20:22, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Term redundancy

Some of the terms here are general musical terms as opposed to strictly piping terms. I suggest they be filtered out, but I'd like second opinions.

BagpipingScotsman 00:54, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree. This article should contain specifically piping-related terms. Maybe that would help reduce the length of the article... MatthewLiberal 02:36, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

FAQ

According to Wikipedia standards, "Wikipedia articles should not list FAQs. Instead, format the information provided as neutral prose within the appropriate article(s)." Thus, I think the FAQ of this article should be worked into the text. MatthewLiberal 02:42, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

References

2007-02-1 Automated pywikipediabot message

Removed transwiki tag as it could probably do with being retranswikied...hope this is the right thing to do?!Calum (talk) 23:29, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

 --CopyToWiktionaryBot 14:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Added a couple templates

I added two templates to this article. I've reviewed the talk page, and some other things were discussed (the FAQ, entries which don't explain the headword), but I wanted to call attention to two specific problems with this article.

1. This is a definition list. Thus, it should be formatted according to the Wikipedia style guide on definition lists. There are also those "Top of Page" and "External Links" links at the end of every letter, which are useless and don't conform to the style. There are lots of glossaries on Wikipedia to look to for examples. (The chess glossary is particularly nice.)
2. There are some run-on sentences, namely in the introductory section, and the style and capitalization of the definitions themselves are inconsistent. Also, there are headwords without definitions. If you'd like to keep these last ones on the page because you intend ultimately to define them (with references, right??), then put them in an HTML comment.

-Nkocharh (talk) 18:40, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I've fixed most of #1 above so I've removed the template. -Nkocharh (talk) 20:02, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Working on article

I'm going to try and do some work on this article, for factual, copyedit, and scoping issues. My general thought is that this glossary should contain any term one might encounter in an article that wouldn't deserve an article of it's own. I'd be the first to admit my worldview is GHB centric, but hopefully we can get this article tightened up and focused a bit. Calum (talk) 19:26, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

And my first pass is done. It really is focused on GHB and Uilleann piping, I'm afraid. However, it is an improvement, so I have taken the liberty of hoiking out the copyedit tag. Calum (talk) 23:27, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Glossary of bagpipe terms. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160122074030/http://www.music.vt.edu/musicdictionary/ to http://www.music.vt.edu/musicdictionary/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:09, 2 July 2016 (UTC)