Talk:Lurgan

Sport

What's this?

"They lost the Under-21 semi-final against Castlerahan on 18 November 2006."

Who are we talking about here? --Eamonnca1 23:31, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Music

This section seems to have become a battleground for bands trying to plug themselves at the expense of the others. I propose that it be deleted. --Eamonnca1 17:33, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

William Frederick McFadzean

How about the following wording to stop this silly edit war: "Died in an explosion of a box of primed grenades prior to the Battle of the Somme." Until someone can cite a source saying that he either dropped a grenade in (implying that he was incompetent) or that he threw himself onto it to save his friends (implying that he was a hero) or both, I suggest we hold off on specifics and stick to NPOV. --16:07, 6 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eamonnca1 (talk • contribs)

If you look at William McFadzean you'll see a links through to proof on the BBC site. Regards, --Blowdart | ^talk 16:18, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

In this case, I think a "neutral" wording is not NPOV. He didn't get the VC for being an eejit with a box of grenades. --Alastair Rae (talk) 10:33, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Can we stop the edit war? If you can't agree an interpretation of the facts then go argue about it over in William McFadzean. --Alastair Rae (talk) 10:37, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Except removing text that is true simply to stop someone else introducing factual errors isn't the way to go about it. --Blowdart | ^talk 10:57, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Current text reads "Died when he threw himself on a box of primed grenades prior to the Battle of the Somme and was awarded the Victoria Cross." This explains why he's notable, and the source is correctly cited, so the text should remain as is. Seems to have stabilised around this anyway. --Eamonnca1 (talk) 20:25, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Census figures

Why aren't the census figures for Lurgan on the article?

I've re-added the historical census figures complete with their citation, and removed the red link that the other editor was objecting to. Please add new comments to the bottom of this page. Please sign comments. Thanks. --Eamonnca1 (talk) 17:41, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Assuming you mean the census figures template, it's a wee bit complicated. See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ireland#Historical populations template --Alastair Rae (talk) 18:06, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I'm the "other editor" mentioned above. Please review the discussion about the addition of the population stats mentioned above. There's currently a checkuser/sock puppet investigation. I'm happy to leave the template in place for now (in a collapsed state and without the redlink). This was a previous compromise agreed before we realised how disruptive this editor could be. Please drop me a note if you still have questions. Thanks Nelson50^T 19:03, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I subsequently found that discussion, didn't see it mentioned on this particular talk page. I'll see you over there. --Eamonnca1 (talk) 19:53, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Lurgan Spade

The origin of the Lurgan spade phrase comes from an actual spade, a Lurgan spade is a bog cutting tool, long and thin to cut turf into sods. It's got nothing to do with any of the suggestions in the article. You can see examples of the Lurgan spade if you go to the museum at Tannaghmore Gardens. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.16.124.133 (talk) 11:15, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

I must admit that I had always thought it referred to a local varity of turf spade but I didn't want to disagree with the Craigavon Historical bods. The Irish language theory looks like a back-formation. Probably never know the right answer. --Alastair Rae (talk) 14:32, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Lurgan Museum

Yesteryearman has added a paragraph about the "Lurgan Museum". I can't find any on-line mention of such a beast. Is it the Craigavon Museum or the Tannaghmore Barn Museum? Anybody got a cite? --Chuunen Baka (talk) 17:02, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

I can't find any mention of it on the web either. I've added a citation request to the page, if I don't see a citation within a month or two then I'll pull that part out. I've tidied it up in the meantime. --Eamonnca1 (talk) 19:58, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm just removing it for now and I'll drop it in here until someone can find a decent source for it.

<quote>The Lurgan Museum houses one of the largest collections of items relating to Irish History in the North of Ireland. The Museum has many photographs and artefacts connected with Lurgan life over the past 150 years. It houses an extensive collection relating to the periods known as "The Troubles", "Operation Harvest" 1956-62, and "The 1916 Easter Rising". This collection also has a popular section covering the social history of the area. </quote>

--Eamonnca1 (talk) 22:01, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Townlands

Just noticed this: "The town sprang up in a townland (baile fearainn) called Lurgan, from which its name was derived. Since then, it has grown to cover the surrounding townlands, which lend their names to many roads and housing estates." Would you say that Lurgan 'covers' all the surrounding townlands? I'm not so sure about that. For the purpose of the postal service, it is customary (but not required) to use the townland followed by 'Lurgan' in the address, but I wouldn't say that this means that Lurgan 'covers' the other townlands as if they are part of Lurgan. --Eamonnca1 (talk) 18:54, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

In this context it simply means that 'Lurgan' (as in 'the built-up area that people call Lurgan') extends into these townlands. I suppose it could be changed to something like: "the urban area has extended into the surrounding townlands" ? ~Asarlaí 19:03, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I've changed it to say that the urban area now extends into the neighbouring townlands. --Eamonnca1 (talk) 22:03, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Lurgan/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: WTF? (talk) 14:02, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

When reviewing this article against the six good article criteria, I have to say that this falls far short of GA at this time.

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   The article does not follow either Wikipedia's manual of style nor WP:UKCITIES guidelines. The UK cities guideline has a lot of very useful information for what sections an article can contain, and I highly recommend looking at that. As for the prose, there's a lot of very short, choppy sentences and sections. The lead section is also too short, and doesn't adequately summarize the article. WP:LEAD can help with this.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   The citations that are included seem to be coming from reliable sources, for the most part. But most of the article is cited somewhat sketchily, at best. Citation information should also follow a consistent formatting, and full citation information should be included (author, title, publisher, date of publication, date URL retrieved for online sources, etc). This is important so that if the link ever disappears, the citation is not rendered useless and information can still be verified through other means.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   The article is neither complete nor focused. Several sections consist solely of bulleted lists, and contain no prose. At present, it seems like a good collection of notes about the city, but is not organized very well into a comprehensive article about it; for example, the "Lurgan spade" section in the middle of the article -- contains three short sentences about a figure of speech, but is inserted somewhat randomly into the middle of it? There's no context for its inclusion, and if it were to be eliminated, at present, I can't see any negative consequences to it (note: I'm not calling for its deletion. Just stating that I can't see the context or importance of it in this article at present). As noted earlier, a review of WP:UKCITIES will help editors of this article tremendously with this aspect.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   It's difficult to properly evaluate an article in such early stages of its development, since neutrality issues could develop at a later stage. At present, the presence of a subsection entitled "the troubles", with just a single sentence, is bringing too much weight to the "murder triangle" element of the town's history, while the rest of the history section, being largely incomplete, doesn't talk about much else.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   On the bright side, I can't see any evidence of edit-warring or WP:3RR violations, so at the time of this review, the article is stable. Though due to the large amount of editing that is still very likely required to bring the article up to GA standards, that could call the article's stability into question prior to achieving GA status.

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   There are only two images in the article at present, and both are tagged and captioned. More photos could be included in the article however. The Lurgan Park photo doesn't really have too much context to the section it's in -- the caption states "Lurgan Park, before a charity fun run." But the "charity fun run" isn't really mentioned in the section.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Overall, the article does not pass all six good article criteria and cannot be listed at this time. "On hold" status is normally reserved for articles that are very close to meeting the criteria, but need a few minor fixes that should be able to be addressed relatively quickly to bring up to standards. I wouldn't be doing editors any favors with that step at this time, so it is better to fail the article and have editors work on the issues outside of GA, and then renominate it once the issues are resolved. For tips in formatting and building articles on UK cities, again I direct you to WP:UKCITIES. There are also several UK cities that are currently listed on the WP:GA page, and I'd recommend looking at those as well. For additional assistance and guidance, you might try asking for help at Wikiproject Cities, or peer review. Hope this helps! Cheers! WTF? (talk) 14:02, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Many thanks for the review. I wasn't sure how far I'd need to go to get it to GA status so I figured I'd nominate it and see if any tips could be forthcoming. This is a good help. --Eamonnca1 (talk) 18:35, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Famous people IKE WEIR

I noticed there isn't a wiki page on the above mentioned boxer who was born in Castle Lane. Would any of you be interested in starting one up. I would only I'm new to all of this. Cheers! Archiesgone (talk) 18:56, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Go right ahead. I've made his name into a red link, you can click on that and go ahead and create the page. Good luck and welcome to wiki! --Eamonnca1 (talk) 19:21, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Thankyou I will start tomorrow, I would need help to put a picture of him up though! Archiesgone (talk) 16:52, 26 February 2010 (UTC) Haven't had a chance to start on Ike's article, need a bit of help too. If someone could manage to put a picture up that would be greatArchiesgone (talk) 18:50, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

'Derry'

The townland called 'Derry' has reappeared again. Where is this place? I know many townlands that start with that word but I don't know if any in the area just called Derry. --Eamonnca1 (talk) 00:46, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

The Placenames Database (click here) shows that there's a townland called 'Derry' in the county of Armagh, barony of Oneilland East, parish of Shankill. Then if we look at an old ordnance survey map (click here, select "historic", and zoom in) we can see that it's directly north of Shankill Church. ~Asarlaí 13:56, 26 February 2010 (UTC)