I don't wish for the kilt to become un-Scottish, I'm only acknowledging that it is becoming Scottish-American, at least around here. As for Wikepedia one must at least realize that many people do look to it for current information. I'd be interested in a review of its' article on kilts, that's for certain. Simply blowing it off when so many 'un-sophisticates' take it at face value may well leave us looking un-balanced, though probably not un-hinged.

Cajunscot, I enjoyed your history lesson but I'm referring mostly to the modern kilt movement, the late 20th Century until now, say starting about the time SportKilt was established, or when Wikepedia started to become a popular source of information in pop culture. Surely men of our relative inteligence with respect to the un-enlightened trousered world must be aware that when a member of Korn starts wearing a kilt then we've drifted into the Wikepedia domain.
Chris,

Perhaps I'm not understanding your meaning here: are you saying that those early immigrants who maintained their connections to Scotland through Scottish culture, such as Highland attire, while at the same time became citizens of the Republic, were not "Scottish-Americans"? I certainly see them as that; proud of their past, but also proud of being citizens of the United States. Please correct me if I am interpreting this wrong, as I have been known to do that on many occasions (just ask my dear wife!)

As far as Wikipedia goes, just because it is easily accessible doesn't mean that it is a good source. Part of my job as a librarian is to educate students that there are much better resources out there than it; they may not be as easily accessible, but from an accuracy standpoint, they are much, much more reliable. As someone who attended college, I'm sure you value accurate and reliable resources just as much as I do. That was my point.

Todd