Talk:Royal Bank of Scotland Group/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Jack Nicklaus 5 Pound Note

I live in SOuthern California and would like to know how I can purchase the new 5 pond notes with honoring Jack Nicklaus. Thank you. dmorgan@tritekcp.com

According to the RBS website [1], people in the USA should email JWNBanknotes@rbos.com if they want one. MrWeeble 21:10, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Improvement Drive

The article Grameen Bank is currently nominated to be improved on Wikipedia:This week's improvement drive. Support this article with your vote.--Fenice 17:20, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

Scottish Gaelic name

The Royal Bank does use the title "Banca Rioghail na h-Alba" in some capacities. It is possible to get Gaelic chequebooks using this name, and it also appears on some of their banks in the north west of Scotland. --MacRusgail 16:52, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

There is no offical Gaelic translation for the corporate name- it is used for marketing purposes in some areas of Scotland. And it is already mentioned in the intro. Astrotrain 22:04, :: 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, the Gaelic name is used by the company. It is therefore official. They are a Scottish bank! And who are you to dismiss it is a marketing ploy? Seriously, why would you say that? Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 22:56, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

It is only used in the Western Isles, the only place where anyone actually cares about the Gaelic language. It is not an offical name of the bank- and we don't add translations of every name in the English Wikipedia. This is an article about The Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC- not the 5 branches of Royal Bank of Scotland plc branded as the Gaelic name. Astrotrain 23:16, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

OK, so this is your argument? You seem rather bitter. But that aside, how do you get around the fact that RBS is a Scottish company and has an official Scottish Gaelic name in a country whose parliament has Scottish Gaelic as an official language? Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 23:27, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Hardly bitter- the article already states the practice of using a direct gaelic translation in those areas, which is appropiate. You are falsely implying there is a bilingual name- the Royal Bank of Scotland Group never use a name other the English name. Astrotrain 23:35, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

But that's not true; as MacRusgail can testify, they use a Gaelic name in Gaelic. That looks like there is a bilingual name to me. The small number of speakers of Gaelic should not be made to hide this just because you hate Gaelic. Regards, Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 23:40, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

If there is no official translation, what are they using in their Gaelic chequebooks then? Or on at least several ATMs. I doubt you've ever seen any of these, so therefore they can't exist.

"It is only used in the Western Isles, the only place where anyone actually cares about the Gaelic language."

Wrong again. I have no connections to the Western Isles. In fact I linked to a picture which in Tiree which is in the Hebrides, but not "the Western Isles". Same goes for Skye. It also appears/used to in Partick.

Clearly you need to travel more Astrotrain. You're one of these folk who thinks that Milngavie is in the north of Scotland presumably. LOL! Stop behaving like a cringing little colonial. --MacRusgail 15:42, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Being Scottish myself and having visited the Western Isles, I do know that all banks use Gaelic in their marketing in this area. However the company, The Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC, does not have an offical Gaelic translation- and as Scotland is not bilingual, there is no need to pretend otherwise. Astrotrain 15:58, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

But Scotland is a bilingual country, and RBS does have an official Gaelic name. So what on earth are you talking about? Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 17:19, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

If you have visited the Outer Hebrides, then you should know better. Gaidhlig signage can be found in the Inner Hebrides, and parts of the mainland. Again, if there is "no official translation", what is the name on their cheque books? Scotland is bilingual, if not trilingual. And that's without mentioning various immigrant communities. Gaidhlig has status within law in Scotland, if you are not aware of that. --MacRusgail 17:34, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Well in response:

• My RBS Cheque book has no Galeic
• The RBS branches in my area of Scotland have no Galeic marketing
• The Companies House Register of both the Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc and its subsidiaries (including Royal Bank of Scotland plc) have no Gaelic name registered
• The Royal Charter founding the bank has no Gaelic name
• The Subseuqent Acts of Parliament relating to the bank have no Galeic name
• There is no Gaelic name outside the Registered Head Office in St Andrew's Sq Edinburgh

- Thus the only Galeic usage is in those areas of Scotland where Galeic is used, for marketing purposes. Astrotrain 17:46, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

I've seen Banca Rioghail na h-Alba on banks and they weren't in the Hebridies outer or otherwise. A pal of mine even has a check book with it on it. Is the Banca Rioghail na h-Alba a different part of The Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC? Perhaps only branches of the Royal Bank of Scotland have the Gaelic Banca Rioghail na h-Alba. What the Group PLC bit is in Gaelic I don't know. Has anyone ever seen the whole of Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC in Gaelic or just the Royal Bank of Scotland bit?

84.135.223.92 17:52, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

From A Galeic Forum- "All the Scottish banks: Bank of Scotland; Royal Bank of Scotland; Clydesdale Bank are very happy to issue cheque books in Ga\idhlig. They regard it as a good form of publicity." Astrotrain 18:01, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

I've been forced to add a disputed tag- the Galeic POV pusher Calgacus is continuing to insist there is an offical galeic name for the Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC without proving any evidence. I have noticed he has tried to insert Galeic in various other articles- such as the Kings of Scotland- before being defeated. Scottish Galeic is generally only inculded for place names and for articles associated with the language where an offical translation exists. It could also be used for bodies which actually use a Galeic name (eg Lews Castle Collge)- but can't be used for other organisation, even if they use Gaelic as a promotional tool in the Western Isles (which was already mentioned). Astrotrain 14:14, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not particularly pro-Gaelic, I'm just not anti-Gaelic like you. I think you're a little confused about the kings of Scotland, as they all have Gaelic names with very little to do with me. I moved some of the page titles of Scottish kings to de-anglicized names, which got voted down on grounds of wiki convention, but I didn't touch the texts. Everyone agrees it would be insane not to have the Gaelic names for Scottish kings somewhere in the text as most of these kings were Gaels themselves as were most of their subjects for most of the time. Anyways, you have already admitted RBS uses a Gaelic name, which means it has an official Gaelic name. You have no argument whatsoever except your hostility to Gaelic. BTW, I suggest you do yourself a favour and remove the inappropriate tag. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 14:46, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

I suppose if no one can produce evidence for the use of Gaelic by The Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC for the whole of the designation The Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC it would certainly be indisputable to include Banca Rioghail na h-Alba alongside Royal Bank of Scotland in the Corporate Structure section. Oh dear! That would mean no Gaelic at the top of the page. Perhaps not such a good idea after all.

84.135.218.142 14:54, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

OK, since the reverting seems to be confined to me and Astrolain only, I will revert myself and take out the two mentions of the Gaelic name if Astrolain promises not to revert if a third party restores it; likewise I will not revert if someone other than Astrolain (anons not counted) reverts the restoration of the third party. That way I propose that both myself and Astrolain take ourselves out of this revert war. If no-one elses bothers, then we can leave it at that. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 15:36, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

"My RBS Cheque book has no Galeic" - aye, well mine does.

"The RBS branches in my area of Scotland have no Galeic marketing" - this could mean anything. The Royal Bank of Scotland has no Welsh marketing in Scotland, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't elsewhere (actually it does).

"The Companies House Register of both the Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc and its subsidiaries (including Royal Bank of Scotland plc) have no Gaelic name registered" - so what? This means that the name is unregistered, not that no official translation exists.

None of these points are particularly convincing other in saying that Banca Rioghail na h-Alba is not regularly used in certain contexts. That is different from saying that there is no official name. I would scan an image of my cheque book into here, but for two things. I don't know the (c) situation, and also if it were allowed, I would have to blank out certain personal details for my own security! --MacRusgail 17:37, 12 November 2006 (UTC) p.s. Is this "Galeic" [sic] thing a bad troll? ;)

If a Gaelic translation of the whole of The Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC exists where can we find it?

It is undisputed that Banca Rioghail na h-Alba (The Royal Bank of Scotland ) is used by branches of the banking arm of The Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC in Scotland. I assume there is a difference between Bank Branches marketed under The Royal Bank of Scotland ( Banca Rioghail na h-Alba) and the Group called The Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC .

84.135.197.54 10:23, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

It is standard good practice to include in the opening sentence the subject of Wikipedia articles in the indigenous language(s) of the country concerned.--Mais oui! 11:39, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

• Only for placenames- not for companies. The Galiec name was already given in the intro- the Group doesn't use Gaelic, and that is not a translation of the Group's name. Re-added disputed tag you inappropiately removed. Astrotrain 11:47, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I dont have any real strong feeling on whether or not to include the Gaelic translation on pages of this type but i do find it amusing/exasperating to find yet another example of the laughable anti-Gaelic anglo prejudices cropping up which seem to occur whenever a topic touched by Gaelic is involved. Going on the points made above by MacRuisgail, Calgacus and Mas Oui in favour of retaining the Gaelic translation and of Astrotrain + some anon in opposition the debate has quite emphatically been won by the former group. siarach 00:27, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Anon has no objections to Gaelic translation on pages of this type. Anon has simply noticed that the Group PLC bit is conspicuous by its absence in the Gaelic translation of The Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC. Anon tried a less controvercial, factually indisputable edit (Retail Banking branches also use the Scottish Gaelic Banca Rioghail na h-Alba in parts of Scotland) but that was cleary too much for Astrotrain. Consequently we are now back to where we started.

84.135.246.219 08:36, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually anon, I would agree with your version over the false and incorrect versions proposed by the others- at least it is factually correct, although messy. Astrotrain 09:06, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually my cheque book says "Banca Rioghail na h-Alba PLC" on it. I checked (no pun intended) last night. --MacRusgail 15:48, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Excellent. Now we have evidence that the abbreviation PLC is PLC in Gaelic. I am curious what the Gaelic PLC is when written in full. We've still to find the Group bit in Gaelic though for the full translation of The Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC.

84.135.246.219 17:12, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

The Group never uses Galeic, it is an international banking and insurance group- not some Western Isles Credit Union. Astrotrain 19:47, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Evidence, yes, but a cheque book from the bank itself is a primary source, not a verifiable secondary one... Wikipedia policy states that: "Articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." ;-) – Kieran T ^{(talk | contribs)} 18:44, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

The check-books are verifiable. Just call up the bank and ask for one. Once lots of documentary histories start getting published on RBS, then you can start talking about the issue with relevance to these types of sources; otherwise, they're not really apllicable. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 19:17, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Violation of Original research Astrotrain 19:55, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Lol, now you look ridiculous (oops, am I not supposed to say things like that?). Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 19:35, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Since no one could come up with the Gaelic translation for the whole of The Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC I decided to make it up Còmhlan Banca Rìoghail na h-Alba cpe. Unfortunately that anti Gaelic bigot Astrobrain keeps deleting it. Can we not get him banned or something?

84.135.197.20 14:31, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

The last refuge of the bitter and the ignorant: accuse someone who simply disgrees with you of being a bigot. The only entries I see in this string worth banning are the pro-Gaelic ones, so who the god-damned hell are you to call for someone to be banned? Your interlocutor has engaged almost entirely with facts: you "Gaelic" lot have simply offered opinion for the majority of the thread. What a joke you are: what stereotypical "little-Scotlanders". 86.17.211.191 00:17, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

We can't just make things up- that would destroy the credibility of Wikipedia. I consider your attempts to insert obviously made up terms (which you even admit to be made up) as vandalism. In the end it will be you who will be banned and not me. We seem to have reached agreement on the article, so leave things be. Astrotrain 14:39, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Template: "The factual accuracy of this article... is disputed"

I do not think that it is at all appropriate to put the {{disputed}} template at the top of the article. The "factual accuracy of this article" is not in dispute: nobody contests that the Gaelic name is in use both by the organisation itself and by others. What is being disputed is the best way to present that information, which is really a rather minor style issue.

Please see WP:LAME. --Mais oui! 12:12, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Scottish Gaelic

Since other users are continuing to push Scottish Gaelic into the article intro- I have added a reference note explaining that the Gaelic name is only used by the Royal Bank of Scotland plc, and not the Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc- and that is not a legal or offical name. I hope this resolves the issue, and the edit war. Astrotrain 22:57, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Where do you get this stuff about official names? If the name is used by the company it is official in respect to the company. Are you talking about the government? Wall Street Journal? What? Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 23:00, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

It is not a legal name- and is not the regsitered name. Rather like Abbey is the trading name of the Abbey National plc. In this case the Gaelic name is being used for marketing in the Western Isles as this is the one area of Scotland where more than 1% of the population can understand that language. Astrotrain 23:02, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Firstly, being "registered" (with what?) is not the criteria for being "official"; the name is in use by the bank itself, and thus qualifies as an official name. Secondly, most people in the Western Isles understand Gaelic and secondly, there are scores of areas of Scotland where more than 1% understand the language, e.g. in Ettrick parish in the Borders 2% of the population know the language. ;) And what, there are like 9000 Gaelic-speakers in Glasgow (admittedly only .95% of the population, but close in such a huge "area"). Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 23:33, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

With what? With the Registrar of Companies, in Edinburgh, or the equivalent at Companies House in the case of an English company. That is precisely "official". We need to be clear here – for the sake of the article, but also to avoid arguments and confusion – about what we mean when we say "name". If we're trying to be precise (as we should be) I'd suggest we don't ever use that word on its own when describing the title of an organisation! There are "registered trademarks", "trademarks", "brands" and all sorts of much more, or at least slightly more precise definitions than merely "name". For the basic so-called "name" given in the article, we'd be best using whatever is in the registration of the company, and use whatever is in their annual report as a valid alternative. Things which are written on signs outside branches may deserve a mention, but they're not necessarily the name of the company. – Kieran T ^{(talk | contribs)} 23:40, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, how does the name used by the company on the front of branches and on cheque-books become unofficial? What, are these branches and chequebooks run and issued by another company or what? Not sure where you're going with this TBH. I wonder, if I set up a bank called Banca Rìoghail na h-Alba, I wonder how far I'd get. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 23:56, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

It's very simple, based on the definition of "official" as meaning: "Given or authorized by a person in authority." (One of the definitions given by Chambers.) It doesn't simply mean "A name the company prints on things." The name on the front of the branches or on a cheque is a brand, a corporate identifier, or even just a logo. It's not "unofficial" in the sense of being "disallowed" or "wrong", but it's not "the name of the company" either. – Kieran T ^{(talk | contribs)} 00:02, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah, OK, so do you have evidence that the chequebooks and official bank-buidling headers were done by people outside the authority of the bank, or against the authority of people of authority there? Otherwise, your logic makes no sense. 00:06, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

That doesn't follow. The graphic designer is irrelevant here unless they are also the Registrar of Companies... 62.30.164.158 00:30, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Why is the graphic designer have to do with it? Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 00:53, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

And in reply to your added sentence about setting up Banca Rìoghail na h-Alba — I expect you'd find that's a Registered Trade Mark, which would cause you problems. But again, that doesn't mean it's already a company name. Anyway, just trying to be helpful. I'm off to bed now so I'll leave you to it. Enjoy. – Kieran T ^{(talk | contribs)} 00:02, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

http://www.rbs.co.uk/Personal_Finances/Ways_to_bank_with_us/Mobile_Bank/history.htm - an article on RBS Mobile Banking which explains that Am Banca Rioghaill is emblazoned on the side of their mobile banks in the Highland region--Liam Mason 18:54, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Is that Gaelic being used by The Royal bank of Scotland Group or The Royal bank of Scotland plc?

81.145.241.91 15:42, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Back to the talk page

Come on guys, this edit warring could be never-ending. And I see we've descended to sarcasm in edit summaries now. Let's establish a consensus here before we mess up the article more. How about we move it to be titled either "Royal Bank of Scotland plc" or (and this would get my vote) "Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc" – with redirects from "Royal Bank of Scotland" if deemed necessary? Or if people feel it's actually inappropriate to do that (because of the bank's historic name in pre-plc days), we could redo the introduction so that it uses the original historical name and leads into the RBS plc and RBS Group plc identities. – Kieran T ^{(talk | contribs)} 14:15, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

This article is about the Royal Bank of Scotland (plc) (as the title and most of the text implies); if you wanna emphasize legal fictions, then create a separate article for the RBS Group. That aside, as there are many people who take such legal fictions seriously, the failure of the article to draw a clear line between the two should be creating a problem for those people. So what you suggest we do? Regards, Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 19:33, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

The problem only arose when you insisted on inserting the Gaelic name used for marketing purposes by the RBS plc. Clearly the history of the group has been the transformation from the bank founded by Royal Charter through to the RBS Group plc- and the article should reflect this. There is no need for a seperate article for the Group and the Bank- as they can be considered together. Problems only arise when pro-Gaelic users insist on using marketing terms as offical, and then attributing them to the holding company. The compromise by Kieran T was brilliant, as it alluded the non-English name to the correct company, and is the best compromise solution Astrotrain 23:17, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Then that should be what the article is about, the Royal Bank of Scotland, rather than merely the Royal Bank of Scotland plc and the RBS Group. The Group has now been put in bold, implying the article is only about the Group, in order to avoid having the Gaelic there. That's simply silly. Regards, Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 00:07, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Well since no one could produce the Gaelic for Group PLC that's one way to get Gaelic at the top of the page. Declare the article to be about the Royal Bank of Scotland PLC and not the Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC. Has anyone failed to notice the infobox is titled The Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC. The article starts with a mention of The Royal Bank of Scotland and continues (Scottish Gaelic: Banca Rìoghail na h-Alba) is a Edinburgh-based company founded in 1727 and then after one sentence seems to become an article about The Royal Bank of Scotland Group where it continues The organization has grown into the banking and insurance holding company known as The Royal Bank of Scotland Group. The Royal Bank of Scotland PLC is dealt with again further on in the article. Is the Royal Bank of Scotland PLC a subsiduary of the Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC or is the Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC a subsiduary of the Royal Bank of Scotland PLC all very confusing, but never mind, the Gaelic is now back at the top of the page.

84.135.242.109 16:21, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Disputed

The RBS plc has not grown into the RBS Group plc- both are seperate entities and still in existence. Calgus is destroying this article- and the dispute tag will have to go back on. Astrotrain 22:19, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey, you really don't want a Gaelic name there, do you? Such passion! The spirit of John Pinkerton lives on! The article is about the Royal Bank of Scotland; if you really believe "RBS plc has not grown into the RBS Group plc- both are seperate entities and still in existence", then I suggest you create a new article about the Royal Bank of Scotland Group. The template at the bottom, for instance, clearly implies they are two entities. RBS plc is clearly just another subsidiary with a spooky similarity of name. Do you think we should have a paragraph on legal fictions? BTW, who gets the earlier history of meta-RBS, the PLC or the Group? Just curious. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 22:33, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

"The spirit of John Pinkerton lives on!" This utterly disgraceful quote reveals that you are the pathetic, whining little bigot here. Just because someone disagrees with you they must be a racist, right? It's people like you who make an increasing number of Englishmen support Scottish independence....I for one can't wait for the day when I don'tr have to pay the way of the likes of you (don't try to trot out the usual Scottish Nationalist "North Sea Oil and Gas" argument: nearly half the fields lay in ENGLISH waters). 86.17.211.191 00:23, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Allowing that the RBS Group plc should have an article, shouldn't that be at Royal Bank of Scotland Group ? The absence of the G* word here would lead me to suppose that this article is about the Royal Bank of Scotland plc. Or am I being obtuse ? Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:03, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Is the The Royal Bank of Scotland (an Edinburgh-based Company founded in 1727) which has grown into the banking and insurance holding company known as The Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc the same beastie as the Royal Bank of Scotland plc (Banca Rìoghail na h-Alba) offering personal and business retail banking services? Click the links to find out.

This article is confusing.

84.135.203.253 00:43, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Plainly, the original RBS "grew into" RBS Group plc and RBS plc. There is no need for a separate RBS Group article which would be just as likely to confuse a reader. What is called for is a straightforward, sensible introduction to this article. An article which presently is specifically titled with neither company name, but with a generic name which – with the aid of a clear introduction – will be suitably titled as an encompassing "overall" article; one about the history of the organisation, leading up to and including its present form.

Let's keep the Gaelic issue separate from the title/subject issue. I for one have no objection to Gaelic where it is actually used by the bank, so long as it's in the right place in the article, and correctly explained.

And please, not least because it's a rule here on Wikipedia, let's all try to assume good faith and not be sarcastic.

May I suggest that we all submit our "ideal" introductions here on the talk page, and modify them collaboratively here, leaving the main article alone for a few days whilst we do so? – Kieran T ^{(talk | contribs)} 01:36, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Allowing that the RBS Group plc should have an article, shouldn't that be at Royal Bank of Scotland Group ? The absence of the G* word here would lead me to suppose that this article is about the Royal Bank of Scotland plc. Or am I being obtuse ? Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:03, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I'd say that point isn't obtuse, but a misreading of the title. It's "Royal Bank of Scotland", not "Royal Bank of Scotland plc". Leaving the "plc" out makes as much difference as leaving out "Group plc". The abbreviation (i.e. missing out "plc") implies either imprecision (not pejoratively) or a prior entity called exactly "Royal Bank of Scotland." – Kieran T ^{(talk | contribs)} 02:54, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Is the The Royal Bank of Scotland (an Edinburgh-based Company founded in 1727) which has grown into the banking and insurance holding company known as The Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc the same beastie as the Royal Bank of Scotland plc (Banca Rìoghail na h-Alba) offering personal and business retail banking services? Click the links to find out.

This article is confusing.

84.135.203.253 00:43, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Quick revew of the saga to date:

• Article seemingly started as Royal Bank of Scotland
• On 20 May 2006 introduction became Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC
• On 7 September 2006 Gaelic added to info box without the Group PLC bit in Gaelic
• Astrobrain immediately went into loopy mode and reverted.
• On 19 October MacRusgail tentitively added Gaelic mentioning it being used on buildings in NW Scotland, a bit down the page in the bit about RBS banknotes.
• Astrobrain didn't react.
• On November 10 Calgacus inserts the Gaelic at the top of the page without the Group PLC bit in Gaelic.
• Astrobrain immediately reverts arguing that is not the Gaelic for the Group PLC.
• Edit war ensues
• Astrobrain seems to be winning with his assertion that the Gaelic is only used by the RBS PLC and not the RBS GROUP PLC
• On 19 November Calgacus rewords the introduction to Royal Bank of Scotland with Gaelic translation

Current state of play would imply the argument is now about whether the article is about the Royal Bank of Scotland or the Royal Bank of Scotland Group

Discuss.

84.135.203.253 01:45, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Please be careful to spell Astrotrain's name correctly. I am going to presume that the people calling him or her "Astrobrain" or "Astrolain" are just making typographical errors, but it could be interpreted another way, which doesn't help the discussion one little bit. – Kieran T ^{(talk | contribs)} 02:54, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

There are two separate legal entities, The Royal Bank of Scotland plc, which is the high street bank in the UK (mainly in Scotland, of course) and then there's The Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc which owns the above together with all the other brands, such as National Westminster Bank plc. We need an entry similar to NatWest for Royal Bank of Scotland. A corporate structure chart would be useful to show how all the various companies all fit within the Group (I'll actually try and create one this evening, upload and add to this page) then it should be possible to see how the various articles will need to take shape. As it stands at the moment, it's a total shambles though. Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 18:08, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

As promised Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 21:30, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

• The RBS Group PLC includes many other subsidiaries (some of which themselves have subsidiaries)- so it is not complete. Astrotrain 22:34, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Whether ot not this article is a total shambles is irrelevant. The main thing is to have the Gaelic for The Royal Bank of Scotland plc near the top of the page and not down near the bottom in some subsection about retail banking in Scotland.

84.135.199.45 12:23, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

printing banknotes

Could anybody please explain how the bank is allowed to print banknotes? Does it have to pay the bank of England for the money it prints? If it didn't, it would have inflationary powers, which seems impossible. i.e. is its ability to print money just a kind of nice little historical license by the bank of England, which means nothing other than different looking notes? (it seems to me this answer must be the right one) Any other inflationary power would undermine the control that the Bank of England is supposed to have. Or, maybe it has a limited right to inflate of some kind? Many thanks if anyone can explain —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.138.168.41 (talk) 18:04, 22 December 2006 (UTC).

• All note issues are backed by Bank of England notes held in reserve. The BoE prints £1 million notes for this purpose. Astrotrain 18:32, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Foundation

Was the Royal Bank of Scotland Group really founded in 1727? 84.135.200.164 09:12, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

http://www.royalbankofscotlandfraud.com

I've removed one of the external links as it's authenticity troubles me. The link as contained in the article was deceptively titled 'Royal Bank of Scotland' when it, in fact, links to a site listing fraud claims. I'm unclear whether this site is actually legitimate as I've read some pages and they seem to be littered with search engine keywords. Can somebody verify that this site is legitimate and, if so, add the link back with a more appropriate title such as:

• Royal Bank of Scotland Fraud Claims

Thanks. Aula^TPN 08:27, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

As this talk page is shared with the Royal Bank of Scotland I should point out that that's where the link was removed from, not here. Aula^TPN 08:36, 26 June 2007 (UTC)