Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ireland: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 255: Line 255:


:The reason many articles appeared in the most recent assessment log, including those you are interested in Sarah, is that someone had vandalised the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category%3AStub-Class_Ireland_articles&diff=301480939&oldid=264127340 stub-class category page] causing the assessment bot to remove all the stub articles but after I fixed the problem, the assessment log restored them which is the result you see. That is why they appeared in the log, but actually nothing was changed in the actual assessments of any of those pages as indicated by the last changes being two years ago for some artcile. Nothing to worry about Sarah. [[User:Ww2censor|ww2censor]] ([[User talk:Ww2censor|talk]]) 16:57, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
:The reason many articles appeared in the most recent assessment log, including those you are interested in Sarah, is that someone had vandalised the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category%3AStub-Class_Ireland_articles&diff=301480939&oldid=264127340 stub-class category page] causing the assessment bot to remove all the stub articles but after I fixed the problem, the assessment log restored them which is the result you see. That is why they appeared in the log, but actually nothing was changed in the actual assessments of any of those pages as indicated by the last changes being two years ago for some artcile. Nothing to worry about Sarah. [[User:Ww2censor|ww2censor]] ([[User talk:Ww2censor|talk]]) 16:57, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

== Historical populations template ==

A template, [[:Template:Historical populations|Historical populations]], has been added to a large number of Irish towns articles, showing population according to census returns from 1821 to 2006. As far as I can see this does not relate to anything in the articles themselves, and it is not IMO inherently interesting. It does, however, badly mess up the articles (see the discussion [[#New navigation box|above]] on the problems caused by vertical infoboxes). I would like to see these templates gone. [[User:Scolaire|Scolaire]] ([[User talk:Scolaire|talk]]) 10:31, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 10:31, 25 July 2009

Template:IECOLL-talk

Irish Wikipedians' notice board

Home

Irish Wikipedians' related news

Discussion

Ireland related discussion (at WikiProject Ireland).

Active Users

Active Irish Users

WikiProjects

Irish WikiProjects

Stubs

Major Irish stubs

Peer review

Articles on Peer review

FA

Articles on FA review

FA Drive

Articles under consideration for FA drive

Archive
Archives
For older Archives see here
Archives
  1. /Archive 4 (Mar 08)
  2. /Archive 5 (17 April 2008)
  3. /Archive 6 (April 2008-September 2008)
  4. /Archive 7 (October 2008-December 2008)
  5. /Archive 8 (January 2009-April 2009)

Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse: Catholic Church connection?

Re Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse (recent news story in Ireland): The coverage of this that I'm seeing in the general press seems to emphasize that this is a "Catholic Church" issue. Our article hardly mentions the Catholic Church. We want to make sure that our article is NPOV and neither over-emphasizes nor under-emphasizes the facts. -- 201.37.230.43 (talk) 16:49, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FAR for Samuel Beckett

I have nominated Samuel Beckett for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Cirt (talk) 06:24, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

British Isles dispute

I don't think it's right to have the article British Isles under WikiProject Ireland seeing as it is an insult to our country to have it under the heading "British". I have complained about the name on Talk:British Isles, and I'm proposing we have a vote by WikiProject Ireland members only, as to whether we should remove the article from the scope of this WikiProject, in protest.--FF3000 (talk) 21:20, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I've never heard an Irish person use this politically motivated term. 86.44.53.226 (talk) 14:57, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You should get out more. LevenBoy (talk) 15:13, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Irish Music

WikiProject Irish Music is in a sorry state. I'm trying to knock new life into it, but if other users don't contribute it will probably have to be merged into WikiProject Ireland. Please join if you can, it's already listed as inactive.--FF3000 (talk) 17:12, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would it not be better off being a workgroup or task force of WikiProject Music rather than a fully fledged WikiProject? ww2censor (talk) 20:10, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, good suggestion but I think that we should make an effort to try and reboot it first, as it is a very important part of Irish culture. I'm sure that there will be some people on both this WikiProject and WikiProject Music dedicated to it. I might also eventually inform the founder of the WikiProject, NaLaochra about the situation if all else fails.--FF3000 (talk) 22:39, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
NaLaochra has not been active for over a year per [1], so that is likely a non-starter. I would suggest posting to a few editors who are currently active in some of the Irish musicians' articles, such as Agadant and Candlewicke to name just two. I am sure you can find more. Good luck ww2censor (talk) 23:14, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea. I'll do that.--FF3000 (talk) 13:24, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But not with much success, unfortunately. --FF3000 (talk) 22:07, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Stewart, Viscount Castlereagh GA Sweeps: On Hold

I have reviewed Robert Stewart, Viscount Castlereagh for GA Sweeps to determine if it still qualifies as a Good Article. In reviewing the article I have found several issues, which I have detailed here. Since the article falls under the scope of this project, I figured you would be interested in contributing to further improve the article. Please comment there to help the article maintain its GA status. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talkcontrib) 02:21, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Can someone create stub for Justice Sean Ryan?

Re the "Ryan Report"/Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse, we don't seem to have an article for Justice Sean Ryan, Judge of the High Court (per http://www.childabusecommission.com/rpt/preface.php ), although we do have one for High Court judge Mary Laffoy. Sean Ryan is a disamb page; he is apparently not included there. Can someone please create a stub for him? I have not made a redlink for this because I have no idea what would be the best style to use for the article title. -- 201.37.230.43 (talk) 14:08, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have created it at Seán Ryan (Irish judge). I'll leave you to fill it out. Scolaire (talk) 07:01, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I see that Seán Ryan (Irish judge) has been deleted per request of the article's creator. I continue to think that we should have an article on this individual on Wikipedia. Discussion? -- 201.37.230.43 (talk) 23:08, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've made my position clear: if anybody who thinks that we should have an article on this individual they can write an article on this individual. What more is there to discuss? Scolaire (talk) 06:54, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Scolaire. Was wondering if anyone else had any thoughts on this. (Answer would seem to be "no".) -- 201.37.230.43 (talk) 01:50, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • 201.37.230.43, I just read your comments on Scoláire's talk page, where you say "I know absolutely nothing about him.... my opinion on whether Wikipedia should have a given article is independent of my personal ability to do any constructive work on that article.... I'm not competent to do much with it", etc. I think you have misunderstood what it takes to create an article like this. All you need is some basic understanding about the world, access to Google and some spare time. You seem to have all three so I am not clear why you didn't build on the stub that Scoláire created for you. I'm not Irish and I don't know anything about the Irish legal system but I managed it—see Seán Ryan (Irish judge)—so you can too. Next time, just go for it! - Pointillist (talk) 17:21, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vote on renaming article to include "British Isles"

There is currently a vote underway to rename an article which was originally 'British Military History' to 'Military history of the British Isles'. There are 5 options to choose from for the new article's title. You can vote for/against one/all here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Military_history_of_the_peoples_of_the_British_Islands#Poll_on_Article_Name 86.44.53.226 (talk) 13:19, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The annon has put this very poorly indeed. The article as it stands now is entitled Military history of the peoples of the British Islands, which was changed a while back from Military history of the peoples of the British Isles.
The article is up for deletion here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Military history of the peoples of the British Islands however with people generally in support of keeping the article user:Highking opened a poll to establish what we should do to proceed.
The current options are as follows:
Option 1 - Military history of the British Isles
Option 2 - British military history
Option 3 - Military history of Britain and Ireland
Option 4 - Create two articles. Military history of Britain + Military history of Ireland
Option 5 - Military history of the United Kingdom
Generally it would seem opposers to option 1 are users who do not want to see Ireland mixed in with the term "British Isles" due to past polatics while users who oppose the other options generally see the term "British Isles" as a geogrpahical term and void of any political intentions on ownership of Ireland etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EnigmaMcmxc (talkcontribs) 17:00, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But it's only a list! Why don't people write proper articles instead of fighting over the titles of non-articles? I would have voted delete but that particular vote is closed. Scolaire (talk) 21:07, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Does this notice breach policy for (what's the damn word???) - trying to advertise for !votes. If so, please delete ASAP. --HighKing (talk) 21:11, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Vote rigging? :p Considering the way the first guy worded it i thought it was best for the time been to give a more fuller picture of the situation but i agree with the two of you.--EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 21:36, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Primate of Ireland" and "Primate of All Ireland"

I am proposing to merge (and extensively edit) Primate of Ireland and Primate of All Ireland. I have opened a discussion here. Scolaire (talk) 21:44, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Input required:-

I've nominated these 2 articles for delation as recommended by mediator at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2009-05-6/Corrib Gas. Please have a look at the deletion debates if possible. The more input on this, the greater chance of consensus being reached. GainLine 12:54, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notice on new Irish Music task force

An Irish Music task force has been set up to temporarily replace WikiProject Irish Music at Wikipedia:WikiProject Ireland/Irish Music. Full details can be found at either page. New users are urgently needed. --FF3000 (talk) 22:32, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I didn't think anyone actually cared... :) :) :) --candlewicke 18:46, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Geraldines

I would like to draw together articles and information on this important family in a more systematic way. At present Geraldines redirects to FitzGerald, which is essentially no more than a dab page. It is difficult to find individual FitzGeralds without knowing in advance exactly what you're looking for. I would like to expand the individual articles, and also have a "Geraldines" article that detailed the history of the FitzGeralds in a fairly comprensive way and linked to as many family members - Norman invaders, earls, rebels etc. - as practicable. If anybody is interested in getting invovlved please let me know on my talk page. Scolaire (talk) 15:29, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Philip Cairns

Hi guys. In my noobiness last month, I edited the pages of Oireachtas TDs with an external link to the new website www.kildarestreet.com (I am a mod on that website). For so doing, my original username (gavinsblog) was blocked indefinitely for alleged spamming. Partly my boo.

What I would like to suggest to the community is that an external link to KildareStreet profiles should be placed on the wikipedia profiles of all TDs and Senators. The KS profiles are both relevant and useful to anyone seeking information on a TD or Senator. For example Dermot Ahern TD. Notice the data, it allows anyone to sign up for and email alert whenever that TD speaks, and gives information on how often they speak in the Dail. It includes links back to their wiki profiles, as well as their election data history and official party website profiles.

KildareStreet is modelled on an API developed by mySociety and used on the British version, theyworkforyou.com. The wikipedia profiles of British MPs contain links to both theyworkforyou and publicwhip.org.uk (For example Tom_Watson_(politician)#External_links.

I am suggesting that all TD profiles contain links (as they already do to ElectionsIreland.org), to their Kildare Street profiles as well. The data is relevant, well presented, and importantly, Kildare Street is run as a not for profit, pro bono project, without ads. Anyone searching for information on their representatives would find an external link to KildareStreet beneficial.

Incidentally, the user who originally complained of link spamming has since accepted that was not my intention, and that adding links to KildareStreet has merit. -- gavinsblog1 (talk) 17:57, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just as a note to everyone - I was the user who originally warned (but was not the blocking admin of) the first account. Thanks! Fin© 19:57, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This website looks useful, though a bit lacking in detail at the moment. I'd have no objections to adding it as an External link for Oireachtas members. Snappy (talk) 04:34, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
KildareStreet is in beta, and the addition of more data (TD expenses, Members' interests etc) is in progress. All data for both houses is included from January 2004 (plans to go back further also). The website is also automatically updated via xml whenever the Oireachtas website itself updates. I will set about adding links, and also perhaps filling in any gaps in TD profiles that I have come across (links to official party websites are broken for the most part). Thanks. gavinsblog1 (talk) 17:12, 10 June 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.203.162.98 (talk)

Irish order of precedence?

Does Ireland have an "order of precedence" article like the United States order of precedence and all those contained at Template:Precedence? Would anyone like to create one if this is not the case or perhaps add a link if one is known? Thanks. --candlewicke 16:22, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's no equivalent in Ireland. --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid (coṁrá) 17:07, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have thrown to together a Military history of Ireland articles as a consequence of developments on Military history of Britain. Please don't come to my page or write snappy edit comments, it was literally thrown together. This is partially deliberate, because I don't want to write too much too quick without out other people being involved. So please can other contribute/fix the article (I've already tagged it with the obvious problems).

Thanks, --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid (coṁrá) 13:08, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vote to sort it out

A poll is on at the BI-taskforce to see whether a compromise can be reached over the usage of the term "British Isles", at Wikipedia:British_Isles_Terminology_task_force#Poll. Just incase you're interested. FF3000 (talk) 22:19, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Closing at 2p.m. (BST) Thursday. FF3000 (talk) 15:34, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Iceland in Ballyfermot

Just to sort out an edit war at the Iceland (supermarket) page, we know that Iceland Ballyfermot reopened last November, but can someone please verify, is it still open? We need someone who lives in the area. FF3000 (talk) 16:41, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I somehow don't think so... and I don't live in Iceland or Ballyfermot... --candlewicke 03:39, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I meant Iceland as in the supermarket. FF3000 (talk) 12:53, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mayoral elections

Are they notable enough for an article? There seem to be several... [2] [3] --candlewicke 23:18, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The relevant info can (or has) been added to the Mayor of X article, e.g. Lord Mayor of Dublin. The minor ones are notable enough in their own right. There is also quite alot of them, every county, city, town and urban council has a Mayor/Chair/Cathaoirleach which changes every year. Snappy (talk) 09:42, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this one has been a recurring theme but the article needs some references. ~ R.T.G 22:38, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

County of

County of Fingal, County of South Dublin, County of Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown, County of North Tipperary, County of South Tipperary. Why was "County of" added to these names?

Looking at the histories it seems on 7 February 2008:

  1. 16:15, Schcambo m (moved South Dublin to South Dublin County: To align with Gaelic name; to prevent confusion with Southside (Dublin); to acknowledge the fact that it is a county and not simply an administrative area.) (undo)
  2. 16:24, Schcambo m (moved Fingal to Fingal County over redirect: Acknowledging that it is a county, not just an administrative area.
  3. 16:45, Djegan m (moved Fingal County to County of Fingal: correct name - "County" always comes first in Ireland naming practice for the county) (undo)
  4. 16:47, Djegan m (moved South Dublin County to County of South Dublin: Irish convention is that "County" comes first in name of county and "County of South Dublin" is official name!) (undo)
  5. 16:51, Djegan m (moved Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown to County of Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown: we might as well rename this one as Fingal and South Dublin have been moved by someone!) (undo)
  6. 16:52, Schcambo m (moved County of Fingal to Fingal County over redirect: 'Fingal' on its own is the official title, the same as 'Wicklow', 'Kildare', etc. Irish convention is simply County x, which is not usable here, so the next most appropriate form is X County.) (undo)
  7. 16:53, Djegan m (moved Fingal County to County of Fingal over redirect) (undo)

Then on 22 May 2008:

  1. 18:36 Schcambo m (moved North Tipperary to County of North Tipperary: Move to align with the Dublin admin counties.)
  2. 18:43 Schcambo m (moved South Tipperary to County of South Tipperary: Move to align with the Dublin admin counties.)

I find all of these arguments weak, and the "County of" superfluous, annoying, and in conflict with WP:COMMONNAME.

  • The official names don't include "County of".
  • The usual Irish formulation "County N" does not (yet) apply to the new counties, in my experience. Still less "County of N".
  • Consistency with each other is a lame policy for article names, especially when it applies to just 5 out of 31.
  • Aligning with Gaelic name is a non-reason.
  • "acknowledge the fact that it is a county and not simply an administrative area." you can do this in the article. It is absurd to worry that readers will draw an invalid inference based on the absence of a word from the article title.
  • Prevent confusion of "South Dublin" with "Southside"? South Dublin still redirects to "County of South Dublin" so that doesnt fix the non-existent problem. A hatnote would do.

jnestorius(talk) 21:49, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

None of the new counties are take the form "County X", "Country of X" or "X County". The most appropriate place for all of them would be, for example, Fingal.
The traditional "Irish convention" arises because Irish counties were named after (formerly) famous places in those counties e.g. Mayo, Clare, Down, Tipperary. The convention is so as to make a distinction between the famous place and the administrative area named after it. The convention has not been extended to the new counties (maybe because there is no need, maybe because people forgot how Irish counties were named - IMHO only Fingal is properly named). In the phrase "Fingal County Council" what is meant is the "County Council" of "Fingal", not the "Council" of "Fingal County" (A "County Council" is a specific type of local government with specific powers under Irish law.)
I don't understand the statement, "Acknowledging that it is a county, not just an administrative area." A county is just an administrative area. --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid (coṁrá) 22:41, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The "County of" seems to be a wikipedia invention, so best to remove it and just have Fingal, South Dublin, North Tipperary etc. as per WP:Commonname. Jnestorius stated that none of the new counties (new being going on fifteen years old!) take the form "County X", says who? Is this the law, some new convention or what? Snappy (talk) 10:05, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Jnestorius stated that..." Actually, I said it. "Is this the law, some new convention or what?" No. Under law none of the counties take the form "County X", that's just a common name. The new counties, for whatever reason, haven't inherited that tradition it seems. A Google search, for example, will bring back 100 times more hits for "County Mayo" than for "County Fingal" ... and 1000 times more hits than for "County North Tipperary". --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid (coṁrá) 11:13, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Pity, because then we'd have thirty-one counties (actually thirty-two when you include The People's Republic of Cork). Therefore, thirty-two counties in a soverign united country recognised the world over as Ireland/Eire - that'd it cut the ground from underneath Sinn Fein! Mischeviously yours, Fergananim (talk) 11:37, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Jnestorius - this is very annoying and certainly in breach of WP:COMMONNAME. While the new counties in Dublin are not so clear (nobody really says "County Fingal") in respect of the traditional Counties of Ireland (all 33 when you include both Tipperary N and S) the near universal common name is "County X". Sarah777 (talk) 08:58, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In all five cases I think the earlier names were better - is what I'm trying to say. Sarah777 (talk) 09:05, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is quite clear from the establishing legislation that the three new administrative Dublin division names are: South Dublin, Fingal and Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown. No county, county of, etc. However Tipperary is not so clear as I see the terms "County of North Tipperary", "County Tipperary, North Riding", "County of Tipperary, North Riding", "Tipperary, North Riding", "Tipperary, South Riding", etc., in a "North Tipperary" search of the statutes and acts. Similar results are obtained for a "South Tipperary" search. ww2censor (talk) 14:30, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Aye, the situation with Tipp isn't so clear (maybe because it isn't *new* like the other "new" counties) - Tipperary North Riding and South Riding have simply been renamed North and South. I'm still unconvinced that the "County" in "County Tipperary North Riding" (or Tipperary North) refers to "Tipperary North Riding". I think it means "County Tipperary" "North Riding". Like their website says, "The County of Tipperary is divided into two administrative areas - North Tipperary and South Tipperary."
Ww3censor, look through the statues you link to and see how they mix "County of Tipperary" with "County of Tipperary (North Riding) e.g. "These Regulations amend the Road Traffic (Speed Limits) (County of Tipperary North Riding) Regulations, 1968 ( S.I. No. 173 of 1968 ) and alter the speed limits applicable to certain roads in the County of Tipperary (North Riding)."
My last 2¢ on this topic is that I think "County X" should be used for the 32 traditional counties. While only the legislative name should be used for the new counties (including Tipp north and south). --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid (coṁrá) 16:12, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just a random thought: since everybody here seems to be agreed that the page moves were inappropriate, why doesn't somebody just move them back? Scolaire (talk) 16:44, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Done --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid (coṁrá) 23:53, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ouch! I think you've done a cut and paste instead of a page move. We may need to ask an admin to fix that. Scolaire (talk) 11:52, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As I always say; there is never one when you want one....HELP!Sarah777 (talk) 15:06, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Arg! Yes. I did. Sorry. Dumb. Wasn't thinking. --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid (coṁrá) 17:42, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Update: I've asked Rockpocket to fix my blunder. --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid (coṁrá) 17:53, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Update: and he has now fixed it. Thanks, Rock! Scolaire (talk) 20:40, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Photograph requests: Headquarters of Aer Lingus and Ryanair

Would someone near Dublin Airport like to photograph the headquarters of Aer Lingus and Ryanair? WhisperToMe (talk) 05:33, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll on Ireland (xxx)

At commons:File talk:Coat of arms of Ireland.svg we have some sources listed. Those sources present the Coat of arms of the Republic of Ireland with more detail than depicted in commons:File:Coat of arms of Ireland.svg. If anyone is interested to improve the file at commons to include those details, that would be great. I do not know how to insert those details. -- Imbris (talk) 21:00, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what details exactly you want to include, Imbris. A description of the COA e.g. "a harp or, stringed argent, on a field azure" can just be added to the "Description" field. If you want to cite sources, <ref></ref> works the same on Commons as it does here. Scolaire (talk) 13:28, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It seems that you did not read the text on Commons. Over there some details were singled out. We do not need to discuss each and every notch, dot or whatever. What I have tryed to do was: (1) Present the reliable source [4]; (2) Notify the community that File:COA IRELAND.PNG by User:Djegan (which was used as a starting point for User:Tonyjeff to create the .sVG) is not official and has flaws in some details; (3) Let the community decide.
I was not prepared to face the sad truth – that nobody cares – much – to be bothered with reading what is written at Commons (and answer the two editors there).
But I am prepared to discuss with editors who would dignify themselves to (a) read the text on Commons, and (b) to play (in fact look) for discrepancies (differences) between the current commons:File:Coat of arms of Ireland.svg and the Reliable Source at WIPO.
When (a) and (b) happen, I would be obliged to comment, but this way, without carying, I will not play the game.
Imbris (talk) 00:32, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Simmer down, Imbris! If you know what needs to be done then just do it. The "sad truth" is that an awful lot of people do not care at all whether an image of a coat of arms has some flaws or not - certainly not enough to read all that text without being told explicitly what to look for. I was trying to help you to organise your thoughts so that if anybody wanted to help, they would know what help was required. Neither I nor anybody else is going to do all the work for you. Scolaire (talk) 07:14, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Time Categories for Irish people

There are no subcategories in Category:Irish people by time period apart from those for the Medieval and Elizabethan periods. How about categories by century for the 16th 17th, 18th, 19th and perhaps 15th and 20th centuries as for most European countries eg Category:18th-century Scottish people Hugo999 (talk) 01:45, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied on Category talk:Irish people by time period. Scolaire (talk) 13:29, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review of Christian Conventions

I've requested a peer review of Christian Conventions. Please have a look at this highly improved article, and review its status. It is probably better than Start Class. We intend to nominate for GA once peer review is complete. --Nemonoman (talk) 04:33, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review is a formal process and if you would like to do that you need to follow the instructions at WP:REVIEW after which you can list the article in the "Peer review" section of this project as being in formal peer review so others know it is happening. Just listing it there, as you did, will not make anything happen. I am reassessing it for this project but anything over B-class is done by the formal nomination processes. ww2censor (talk) 14:44, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have done this by the book, but I have chosen "Philosophy/Religion" as prime for the review. Ireland Project claims article is in its scope, so this is courtesy notice. --Nemonoman (talk) 15:12, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds fine. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 15:26, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA (Sweeps) Reassessment of Leprechaun

Leprechaun has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.

New navigation box

I am proposing the creation of a new navigation box for the project, based on Template:WPAVIATION Navigation. I know that a navbox already exists, but I think that a better box is needed. FF3000 · talk 22:15, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am currently working on it at User:Footyfanatic3000/Template:WPIreland Navigation. Feel free to help me. There are still some links to the Aviation WikiProject, but I'll fix these over time. FF3000 · talk 11:35, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The main problem with vertical navboxes is that they are very intrusive, especially in shorter articles. Horizontal navboxes just work much better with the general article layout. The vertical style forces editors to place images not adjacent to the associated prose or to be ranged left leaving the text squashed between images and the navbox which is rather ugly. Even the use of the town infoboxes causes this problem to some extent when there is little prose and adding another vertical navbox will only compound the situation further. The only way a vertical navbox sort of works is when it is displayed by default in a collapsed state but once opened the page layout goes haywire. Consider that and also what articles might actually benefit from such a navbox. I seem to recall that a previous attempt was made to introduce a new, vertical style, template some time ago but I don't have it on my watchlist anymore so it may have been deleted but it never went into use. ww2censor (talk) 14:03, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) I have completed the new navigation box here. Please take a look and make any edits that you think are needed, and give your opinion on whether or not it should be used, or e.g. if this box should be used along with the other box. --FF3000 · talk 14:05, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have added the navbox to this page for testing, and it seems to work without intruding on the article. Please remove it if you think it looks ugly. FF3000 · talk 17:47, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Two comments: First, I agree with Ww2censor about vertical infoboxes; even if they sit quite happily when they'e added first, it's not long before another template, image or something else interacts with them and the text is thrown all over the place. Second, we have to get rid of these gaudy green and orange colours on everything relating to Ireland! I'm as patriotic as the next person but, apart from anything else, some project members are unionists and they should be able to come to this page without feeling as though they're at a Sinn Féin cumann meeting. Scolaire (talk) 05:55, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The colours are completely unreadable, never mind any political import. They're the wrong green and gold. I prefer the current Infobox. Mise, le dúthracht mhór, -- Evertype· 08:25, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have to agree that the infobox colours are very offputting. Why use colours at all? --HighKing (talk) 11:03, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Years in Ireland series

I promised myself never to revisit this series but they recently featured in the July 16 article quality assessment log. Numerous have been re-rated in importance from "low" to "mid" without any obvious reason. Even odder is that the talkpage histories appear to show the last change was actually done 2 years ago! We need to standardise this. Ww2 and SeoR; your attention is required! Sarah777 (talk) 11:08, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The reason many articles appeared in the most recent assessment log, including those you are interested in Sarah, is that someone had vandalised the stub-class category page causing the assessment bot to remove all the stub articles but after I fixed the problem, the assessment log restored them which is the result you see. That is why they appeared in the log, but actually nothing was changed in the actual assessments of any of those pages as indicated by the last changes being two years ago for some artcile. Nothing to worry about Sarah. ww2censor (talk) 16:57, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Historical populations template

A template, Historical populations, has been added to a large number of Irish towns articles, showing population according to census returns from 1821 to 2006. As far as I can see this does not relate to anything in the articles themselves, and it is not IMO inherently interesting. It does, however, badly mess up the articles (see the discussion above on the problems caused by vertical infoboxes). I would like to see these templates gone. Scolaire (talk) 10:31, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]