Talk:Taoiseach

Proposed formatting alteration

From this:

No.		Party
	1.	Cumann na nGaedheal
	2.	Fianna Fáil
	3.	Fine Gael
	(2)	Fianna Fáil

To this:

No.	Party
1	Cumann na nGaedheal
2	Fianna Fáil
3	Fine Gael
(2)	Fianna Fáil

Several reasons for this:

• It makes the colour more prominent.
• It brings the formatting into line with other lists such as the New Zealand PMs, the French Presidents and the US Presidents.
• It reflects the Fianna Fáil logo, white text on coloured background.

What do people think? BartBassist (talk) 09:03, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't favour it. I think it makes the colour too prominent. It will bring it into line with other articles that you have edited, that's all. Why on earth should it reflect one parties logo? Snappy (talk) 18:02, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Use of non-free images

I removed all the non-free images per WP:NFCC and WP:NFLISTS, just like President of Ireland and Tánaiste which had several non-free images and occasionally gets them added back. While some images have fair-use rationales for this use those rationales don't stand up to the scrutiny of the non-free policy. It is ok to use a non-free image of a deceased person in their own article but not elsewhere without justification and not in lists or list type articles. Yes it makes the table look less interesting but that's the way it is. You can always bring the issue up at Wikipedia:Non-free content review if you want. ww2censor (talk) 20:57, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Plural

In my view it would be good if the opening text explained that the plural of "Taoiseach" is "Taoisigh". I'm not sure how to add this in an "elegant" fashion, though, particularly as it would also need a transcription, etc. of its pronunciation! Andrew Gwilliam (talk) 22:40, 19 June 2011 (UTC).

Does it really? Isn't a reference enough? The reason I moved into a footnote is because it meant a total of 5 IPAs in one short intro sentence which was way too many. Snappy (talk) 19:11, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

I hadn't actually spotted the footnote with the plural! I tend to associate footnotes with the citation of sources, and am not convinced by this approach. However, I don't have a better alternative to offer, so I'll leave it at that.

That aside, the wording of footnote no. 4 leaves something to be desired, since it implies that "An Taoiseach" is another plural form. Rather than reword it myself, though, it leads me onto something that struck me on reading another Ireland-related article yesterday. I don't speak Irish, but it seems to me that "institutional" terms in Irish make more frequent use of an initial definite article than would be the case in English. There's nothing about this on the relative Wikipedia policy page for Ireland (unfortunately, I can't remember the URL I looked at off-hand). Should all/most "institutional" articles with an Irish name noted in the lede have (or have as a footnoted [?] alternative) the form given with "An", or should none? Or am I completely barking up the wrong tree here?

Andrew Gwilliam (talk) 00:12, 21 June 2011 (UTC).

I amended the footnote for clarity. "I don't speak Irish, but it seems to me that "institutional" terms in Irish make more frequent use of an initial definite article than would be the case in English." - um, no, I wouldn't think so. Irish isn't like French, where every noun should have an article; it's more like English in that respect, so I wouldn't expect an increased frequency of use. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 13:03, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

"Irish isn't like French": that isn't really what I meant. I was thinking about usage on signs and on websites, such as "An Roinn Airgeadais / Department of Finance", "An Roinn Caiteachais Phoiblí agus Athchóirithe / Department of Public Expenditure and Reform", and so on. It's only a little thing, but it seems to exist... albeit perhaps only in the dizzy realms of officialdom! Andrew Gwilliam (talk) 19:07, 21 June 2011 (UTC).

File:Haughey.JPG Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Haughey.JPG, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests December 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:17, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Brian Cowen by maxime.bernier.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Brian Cowen by maxime.bernier.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:59, 6 January 2012 (UTC)