This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.
there are a lot of "could be" and "possibly" in that section. You could not be totally happy with that, although I know that we're talking about largely undocumented times. Laurel Lodged (talk) 12:55, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
I'm not really happy with the recent move of thia article, while "Ossory" may give more hits on google, this anglification is normally used on the latter earldoms, while the mediaval kingdom in scholarly sources are normally called "Osraige". I would appreciate a more detailed explanationfor this move the edit summary concerning google book hits. Best regards, Finn Rindahl (talk) 13:21, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
The article has been at this title since creation in 2005, a move should at least have been signalled on Talk page, or better still done by WP:RM. However the article is now (automatically) redirect-locked preventing the WP:BRD cycle. A technical request will be required to restore status. Then if someone wants to move they can put in WP:RM. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:42, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
No, this should go through an RM if a move is desired, barring some very compelling evidence that the original move was out of line with the sources. It wasn't out of line with the process.Cúchullaint/c 15:20, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
I don't feel like going through WP:RM-procedures (whatever they might be, I try my best to avoid pages with shortcuts here) in order to overturn this move. Agree with In ictu ocoli that it should have been signalled here first though. Best regards, Finn Rindahl (talk) 16:03, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
I agree that it should have been discussed first, did you ever ask for the mover's input? But clearly a case can be made for either title. Opening it up for community input would help find the preferable title.Cúchullaint/c 16:42, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
I asked for input here, in the first post in this section. Nothing more than that. Time would probably be better spent improving this article than discussing what name it should have, so I'll leave it at that. Finn Rindahl (talk) 21:44, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Agreed, just pointing out what should be done if a move is desired.Cúchullaint/c 21:52, 10 January 2013 (UTC)