I've read the whole article, and it still says nothing about the origins of the name other than *confirming* that it's not gaelic...which we'd *already* established many posts above.

Have *you* read the thread? Or indeed my reply to your post in context? If so I totally fail to understand your aggressive stance.

The article mentions nothing about a French derivation for the name...and we've already discussed that probability at some length.

We'd also discussed the probability that a writer in Glasgow had got his geography out.

So what *exactly* did your "google is your friend" post and link add to the discussion? To say nothing of your subsequent rude reply.