Talk:Birmingham pub bombings: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 19:27, 2 August 2007

This is a WikiProject, an area for focused collaboration among Wikipedians. New participants are welcome; please feel free to participate!

Shortcut

WP:IR

Irish Republicanism articles by quality and importance
Quality	Importance
Quality	Top	High	Mid	Low	NA	???	Total
FA	1	1	1				3
GA	1	2	6	3			12
B	12	16	41	27		5	101
C	5	10	53	64		26	158
Start	4	37	170	198		127	536
Stub		1	26	77		29	133
List	1	2	2	10		3	18
NA		1	4	3	204		212
Assessed	24	70	303	382	204	190	1,173
Total	24	70	303	382	204	190	1,173

Welcome to the Irish Republicanism WikiProject, a collaboration of editors dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of Irish republicanism, Irish nationalism, and related organizations, peoples, and other topics.

(For more information on WikiProjects, please see Wikipedia:WikiProject and the Guide to WikiProjects).

Goals

Improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to Irish Republicanism and Irish Nationalism.
Gather interested editors, and provide a central location to discuss matters pertaining to the above.

Scope

Topics related to Irish Republicanism and Irish Nationalism.

Guidelines

Open tasks

This 'To do' list- has it been updated since 2007? Basket Feudalist (talk) 16:14, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Armed Campaigns

Republican Wars

(1798) - 1798 rebellion
(1916) - Easter Rising
(1919 - 1921) - Irish War of Independence
(1922 - 1923) - Irish Civil War

Others

Events

Battle of the Bogside

Armed Republican Groups

For an organized hierarchial chart, see Genealogy of the IRA

Irish Republicans

Note: There are many, many IRA Volunteers of varying memberships, and we cannot list them all here. We have many categories for that. Only particularly notable members should be listed here.

Early Volunteers; the Wars

Later IRA

Official IRA: Cathal Goulding
Provisionals: Joe McDonnell
Continuity IRA: Dáithí Ó Conaill
Real IRA: Michael McKevitt
INLA: Seamus Costello, Dessie O'Hare

Other

The Green Book (IRA training manual)

Participants

This user is a member of WikiProject Irish Republicanism.

Please feel free to add yourself here, and to indicate any areas of particular interest

Paddytheceltic (talk · contribs) Protestant Nationalists, Militant oganisations, Political Organizations and others..
Erin Go Bragh (talk · contribs) Militant Armed Irish Republican organizations. Gaelic.
Kathryn NicDhàna (talk · contribs) I've been working on some of the articles about women in the Easter Rising.
Pauric (talk · contribs) Too much to mention
Derry Boi (talk · contribs) Interested in all areas of republicanism really.
One Night In Hackney (talk · contribs) Bit of everything
Irish Republican (talk · contribs) Irish Republicanism 1798-Present
Vintagekits (talk · contribs) Irish Republicanism past and present with more focus on the history of the Provisionals
Phoblacht (talk · contribs) Republican Newspapers from 1790’s to Present.
GiollaUidir (talk · contribs) Republican activities from the 1969-mid 80's. Also, biogs of (primarily) dead activists both political and military. Post-1986 is mainly CIRA activity and shoot-to-kill operations by the SAS etc.
Leopold III (talk · contribs) The leaders in the period from the Easter Rising to the end of the Civil War.
Kevin Murray (talk · contribs) Learning more and helping where I can.
Scolaire (talk · contribs) 20th century history, especially the 1913-1922 period
Sheehan07 (talk · contribs) Love Irish History
Sbfenian1916 (talk · contribs) Love Irish Republicansim, hate Unionism.
United and Free (talk · contribs)- PIRA history and operations
Fluffy999 (talk · contribs) Inter(world)war republican activities. Internment and extra judicial activities surrounding Irish Republicanism.
Free Scotland, Unite Ireland (talk · contribs) Interested in post- St Andrews agreement Republicanism.
Diarmaid (talk · contribs) Six county sovereignty
Domer48 (talk · contribs) Period covered by the Irish Confederation (Young Ireland)
Conghaileach (talk · contribs) Special interest in left-republican history
Max rspct (talk · contribs) PIRA;INLA; civil war era; 70s 80s 90s; links/solidarity abroad;
Carrignafoy (talk · contribs) War of Independence and Civil War (especially in Cork) also development of Official Sinn Féin and its successors.
Brixton Busters (talk · contribs)
BigDunc (talk · contribs)
Ró2000 (talk • contribs) Tá suim mhór agam i stair náisiúnta na hÉireann, neamhspleach go háirithe!!
quirk666 (talk · contribs) Republicanism 1798-present. 32 County Sovereignty Movement
gavcos (talk · contribs) Old IRA, War of Independence, Civil War
ElementalEternity (talk · contribs) 20:31, 24 August 2007 (UTC)Irish history and republicanism in general.[reply]
Biofoundationsoflanguage 15:12, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Moz1916 (talk · contribs) All Irish history, especially 1903-1932
Princess Pea Face (talk · contribs) Ireland pure and simple
Barryob (talk · contribs)
NIscroll (talk · contribs) --NIscroll (talk) 19:37, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
RSFRuairi (talk · contribs) Anything really.
Gr8opinionater (talk · contribs) 1:10 July 27 2008 (GMT), Interested in Irish nationalism in general particularly from a Political and historical point of view.
Lihaas (talk · contribs) open to much
EoinBach (talk · contribs) Irish republicanism in general from an academic point of view
Gerard Madden (talk · contribs)
SPARTAN-J024 (talk · contribs) I have ties to the Easter Rising and the Irish War of Independence
NewIreland2009 (talk) The 1912-1924 period, with a particular passion for challenging popular myths of the period.
Dribblingscribe (talk) 20:21, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Tippsno1fan (talk · contribs) Tá an-spéis agam ann
Gallagher-Glass (talk · contribs) General interest.
Fallduff (talk · contribs) National Archives, Dublin and Na Fianna Éireann, pre Northern Troubles
Mabuska (talk · contribs) maintaining neutrality and verifiability
Nicholas Urquhart (talk · contribs) military operations of the "New IRAs": the Provos, the Reals and even OnH, the Official and Continuity IRA.
You Can Act Like A Man (talk · contribs) 32 CSM
Finnegas (talk · contribs)
Sittingonthefence (talk · contribs) Irish republicanism as a philosophy. 1916 and War of Independence combatants.
High_Noonan (talk · contribs) Tom Hunter, 1916, War of Independence
Antiqueight (talk · contribs) Women involved in 1916 or similar.
AusLondonder (talk · contribs) General matters.
Tdv123 (talk · contribs) PIRA, OIRA, INLA, IPLO, ICA, IVF, SE, CRF, SARAF, PLA
Irishpolitical (talk · contribs) Traditionalist Republicanism and Nationalism. Dissenting republicans post GFA. Anti-communist Republicanism.
CnocBride (talk · contribs) All Irish history, though my favourite time period would be the vast 1800–2011 period.
KINGHB190 (talk · contribs) A Corkonian with ancestry in the original Irish Republican Army.
Endersslay (talk · contribs) Enjoy Irish republican music and history.
R0paire-wiki (talk · contribs) Irish Republicanism past and present, with particular focus on Socialist Republicanism.

Userbox

Feel free to place {{User WP:IR}} on your User page to advertise our WikiProject!

Articles

Featured content

1981 Irish hunger strike

Candidates

Good articles

Candidates

Articles in need of urgent attention

Please provide a short explanation, or leave a note on our talk page if needed.

John Sweetman. Article on 2nd President of SF needs more footnotes, and appears to have been compiled largely from reports in The Times of London, which is hardly a neutral source on an Irish Republican.

Please feel free to list your new Irish Republican Army-related articles here (newer articles at the top, please). Any new articles that have an interesting or unusual fact in them should be suggested for the Did you know? box on the Main Page.

Collaboration

The article listed here is our current official article to collaborate on. Propose new articles in the Nominations section below.

Nominations

James Larkin - Grosseteste (talk) 17:16, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Review

Peer review

Assessment / Project's Assessment page

Assessment requests:

Language

Gaelic words and phrases should be marked up using {{lang}}, thus: {{lang|ga|Páirc na hÉireann}}.

Templates

To use the following template, simply put {{IRAs}} at the bottom of an article.

To use the following template, simply put {{NIPP}} at the bottom of an article.

Articles which fall within our scope should be labeled as such on their talk pages. To do so, simply place {{WP IR}} at the top of article's talk page.

Irish republicanism Unassessed

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Irish republicanism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Irish republicanism and Irish nationalism related topics 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.Irish republicanismWikipedia:WikiProject Irish republicanismTemplate:WikiProject Irish republicanismIrish republicanism articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Resources

Using references

For a simple guide to using references, place {{subst:refstart}} (including brackets) on your user or talk page.

Related projects

West Midlands Unassessed

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject West Midlands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of West Midlands 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.West MidlandsWikipedia:WikiProject West MidlandsTemplate:WikiProject West MidlandsWest Midlands articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Images

Is it possible to get images of the result of the bombings? Also, it might be good to get images of the sites at present times. - Erebus555 14:18, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you from Brum Erebus? If you've got a digital camera... It would really improve the article (I'm feeling cheeky today!)Weggie 14:35, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I should be able to get some present day pictures very soon. But I think pictures of the damage caused would really improve the article a lot. - Erebus555 16:57, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality

While I don't doubt that a terrible wrong was done to the Birmingham Six, I have seen no reliable source for the claim that their "convictions [were] overturned due to police tampering with evidence", and that is certainly not what the cited reference says was the case. Nor is Talk:Provisional Irish Republican Army (in an edit summary) a viable reference. To refer to them as "Six innocent people" is also PoV, and uncited (my request for a citation has just been removed); we don't know that they were not guilty of something else, and we don't normally refer to people as such. Andy Mabbett 11:18, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

References from both British and Irish politicans describing them as innocent added. Brixton Busters 11:36, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Those are references for a statement to the effect that "several politicians described them as innocent"; not the statement in the article. Andy Mabbett 14:18, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They were cleared in a court of law. Politicans have said they are innocent. Unless you have any source to say otherwise Pigsonthewing (as opposed to your own opinion), they are innocent. I am removing the tag. Brixton Busters 14:24, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The tag also referred to the improperly-cited point about evidence, Kindly restore it. Andy Mabbett 16:43, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The evidence point is covered in the link to CAIN. No need to restore it.GiollaUidir 16:53, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

CAIN says "Six men ... were freed by the Court of Appeal in London. ... The six had been found guilty on the basis of forensic evidence and confessions that the men claimed were beaten out of them. The forensic evidence was shown to be unreliable and there was evidence that the police had forged notes of interviews and had given false evidence at the original trial." It does not say "they had their convictions overturned due to police tampering with evidence". I can see that you do not agree with me on this point, but I cannot see how you can contend that there is no dispute Andy Mabbett 17:35, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In this case "innocent" is being used as a factual description of the legal status of the individuals known as the Brimingham Six. It would be POV and emotive to use "innocent" in the context of "21 innocent civilians were callously murdered by the cowards etc".

Also, "we don't know that they were not guilty of something else", that is totally irrelevant. They were innocent of involvement in the Birmingham Bombings, which is the subject of the article.GiollaUidir 16:13, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Even if so, if they were innocent in the sense that they had their convictions overturned, to say "six innocent people ... had their convictions overturned" is a tautology. Andy Mabbett 17:39, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Um, not really. It's called a miscarriage of justice. GiollaUidir 17:43, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Police did tamper with evidence. Notes from interviews are evidence, so forging them is tampering with evidence. Brixton Busters 13:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where did I say that they didn't? Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 14:12, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right at the top. You said: I have seen no reliable source for the claim that their "convictions [were] overturned due to police tampering with evidence. Are you saying you want more information adding about the criminal activities of West Midlands Police? Brixton Busters 14:20, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So I did; but that doesn't say that the evidence was not tampered with. I want to see a citation which proves that the reason the conviction was overturned was that tampering, as currently claimed in the article, or for that currently unsourced claim to be removed. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 15:58, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can't fault your logic there, Andy - but wouldn't it be fairer to the Six and their families to leave the statement in for a few days to give folks time to come up with a reference. (I know that isn't the way that WP usually works, but just to show a spirit of compromise and good will to 303, since Domer48 claims that Brixton Buster's a brand new editor? I'm sure that 303 will be able to come up with a citation pretty rqapidly.)...Gaimhreadhan

^{(kiwiexile at DMOZ)} • 16:10, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How about this obituary [1]? Brixton Busters 16:05, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're getting there, but not quite there yet, since the relevant passage only reads: "The convictions were quashed four years later on the grounds that confessions to police officers had been improperly admitted in evidence." Here's a better one: [2]

Since you're quite close to the Strand, why don't you pop round to the Judges Library near the Bear Garden and ask for a day pass for research purposes? Tell them you're contributing to an encyclopedia article and want to get your facts straight....Gaimhreadhan

^{(kiwiexile at DMOZ)} • 16:14, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Dead

Following removed on grounds of (rv per WP:NOT) ...too cryptic for me. Aatomic1 22:51, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe this will help you - as Per not a memorial see here for discussion.--Vintagekits 23:07, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read the links I provided and are you going to reply to this?--Vintagekits 23:49, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm removing the names, the second discussion says they should not be included. Brixton Busters 08:37, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

my two cents, see discussion, [3]--Domer48 21:37, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vintage, Domer and Brixton are right. Including the names is a breach of WP:NOT. If there is a weblisting of them somewhere else, it could be included as an external link. Bastun^{BaStun not BaTsun} 22:51, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Carrickmakeegan Tragedy? Aatomic1 11:50, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Fixed now. Regards, Bastun^{BaStun not BaTsun} 16:50, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOT) Refers to subjects of Wkipedia articles; these people are not subjects of wiki articles. Adding the names aids the reader gain encyclodedic knowledge of the incidents. Aatomic1 16:24, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See the second discussion. Pointless trivia adds nothing. Brixton Busters 16:37, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it does; no it doesn't; yes it does Aatomic1 16:56, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please respect consensus, both here and in the linked discussion. Brixton Busters 16:59, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[WP:OWN] Aatomic1 17:13, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aatomic, please stop edit warring. The listing of the dead add nothing to the article and wiki is not a memorial per WP:NOT.--Vintagekits 18:50, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

<reduce indent> I just came across this article. While I can sort of see the point of not listing the dead on articles like this (or other tragedies/massacres), my first reaction on reading the article was "there's nothing about the victims". Also, there's nothing about wounded, survivors, etc. It's an omission. The reason the event is notable is because it killed/wounded those people. Even if they're not individually historically notable, together they are the victims of the Birmingham Pub bombings. That's notability, and the fact that "just" ordinary people killed in this event is also relevant in understanding the times and the events of the times, so a description of their "ordinariness" is relevant. In any case there were 21 of them, not thousands, so a list wouldn't be impossible. I don't know much about the events, so can't offer to help, but wanted to make that comment. Perhaps knowledgeable editors can take it into account somehow. Even if no list of names if possible, more information is badly needed. Hughsheehy 22:32, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the names (again) Aatomic1 07:30, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can understand both your reasoning, Aatomic1 (and Hughsheehy), and that of Bastun . In principle, would you be willing to enter into a more formal process to try and reach a consensus viewpoint about listing victims in articles with a Green tinge, Aatomic1 and Hughsheehy?

Aside from that question, my compromise suggestion would be to have a list of victims only where their victimhood is an important part of making the subject of the article notable and the list of victims constitutes less than 10% of the characters in our article...Gaimhreadhan ^{(kiwiexile at DMOZ)}talk • 08:39, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In this particular article there were another set of victims namely the Birmingham Six who are still libelled and slandered often by the question If they didn’t do it then who did?. While this encyclopedia may or may not be able to answer this question, there is further information available that can enlighten the reader; such as naming members of the IRA active service unit that was operating in Birmingham at the time (I have added these to List of members of the Irish Republican Army. However for truly balanced coverage it is right that the names of direct ‘other ‘victims are available to the reader; the level of notability being set at death rather than injury. Aatomic1 10:51, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus is not to include the names. Brixton Busters 11:36, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a relatively new account here, you are certainly not the arbiter of consensus, Brixton Busters.

Please do not edit war by reverting others without exhausting discussion on this, the article's discussion, page first.

Please also provide a reason why you wish to obfuscate the distinction between Irish_Republican_Army and Provisional_Irish_Republican_Army. Please remember that this is an encyclopaedia and is not intended to push a particular minority political viewpoint...Gaimhreadhan ^{(kiwiexile at DMOZ)}talk • 12:50, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Provisional Irish Republican Army#Abreviate to .22PIRA.22 or .22IRA.22 .3F - be careful what you agree to. The linked discussion about the names is clear, consensus says the names stay out. Until that consensus changes, the names stay out. Brixton Busters 13:16, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brixton, you are a new user, so therefore it is understandable if you don't know all the policies. What you have linked to does not meet any definition of WP:CONSENSUS. Until a short time ago, it was a discussion with one user saying 'Let's do this' and two others saying 'Well, maybe not.' (The views of a third user banned for sectarian attacks and threats of violence can be discounted). Consensus affecting many articles cannot be achieved between such a small number of users on the talk page of one article. Discussion should be centralised and involve more than a tiny handful of users. Until that happens, there isn't consensus. Bastun^{BaStun not BaTsun} 14:41, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have nothing to add to the erudite argument above other than to confirm that my assent was indeed limited to our specific article on the Provisional Irish Republican Army. [For an encyclopaedia, the wish to have a readable and common style and avoid boring repetition must always be subservient to clarity. As an on-line encyclopaedia we have the space to be both precise and balanced]...Gaimhreadhan ^{(kiwiexile at DMOZ)}talk • 14:48, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any chance we could provide the year these victims were born, instead of the age that they were when they died? I think it is more encyclopedic that way-- the year is provided as a means of identifying the victim, whereas the age could be seen as pushing the POV that people were cut down in the prime of their lives. The recently featured article, École Polytechnique massacre has year of birth, and I think it looks better.

@@ Line 77: / Line 77: @@
 ::::Brixton, you are a new user, so therefore it is understandable if you don't know all the policies.  What you have linked to does not meet any definition of [[WP:CONSENSUS]].  Until a short time ago, it was a discussion with one user saying 'Let's do this' and two others saying 'Well, maybe not.' (The views of a third user banned for sectarian attacks and threats of violence can be discounted).  Consensus affecting many articles cannot be achieved between such a small number of users on the talk page of one article. Discussion should be centralised and involve more than a tiny handful of users.  Until that happens, there isn't consensus. [[User:Bastun|<span style="font-family:Verdana, sans-serif">Bastun</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Bastun|BaStun not BaTsun]]</sup> 14:41, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 :::::I have nothing to add to the erudite argument above other than to confirm that my assent was indeed limited to our specific article on the [[Provisional Irish Republican Army]]. [For an encyclopaedia, the wish to have a readable and common style and avoid boring repetition must always be subservient to clarity. As an on-line encyclopaedia we have the space to be both precise and balanced]...<span style="border:1px solid lime;color:green;">Gaimhreadhan <sup><font color="brown"><small>(kiwiexile at DMOZ) </small></font></sup>[[User_talk:Gaimhreadhan|<font style="color:green;background:lime;">talk</font>]]</span>  • 14:48, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
+Is there any chance we could provide the year these victims were born, instead of the age that they were when they died?  I think it is more encyclopedic that way-- the year is provided as a means of identifying the victim, whereas the age could be seen as pushing the POV that people were cut down in the prime of their lives.  The recently featured article, [[École Polytechnique massacre]] has year of birth, and I think it looks better.

Revision as of 19:27, 2 August 2007

Goals

Scope

Guidelines

Open tasks

Armed Campaigns

Republican Wars

Others

Events

Armed Republican Groups

Irish Republicans

Early Volunteers; the Wars

Later IRA

Other

Participants

Userbox

Articles

Featured content

Candidates

Good articles

Candidates

Articles in need of urgent attention

Suggestions for new articles

Articles in Preparation

New articles

Collaboration

Nominations

Review

Language

Templates

Banner

Categories

Regular cats

Project organisation cats

Resources

Using references

Related projects

Images

Neutrality

The Dead