Talk:Oireachtas Golf Society scandal

Oversight of the article

@Spleodrach: @BrownHairedGirl: @Bastun: Hi. I've just started this article and I wanted to make you, as some of the most active editors in Irish circles, aware of it. I imagine that article could well become an article of significant or at least interest for many people and as such, I just want to make sure the article is of a good standard. I'm going to give it a good shake, and I'm sure I won't be the only one, but if you guys could keep an eye on it and tweak it as well that might be for the collective good. What I've added so far is really only the starting point, the whole subject is already such a sprawling topic it requires quite a lot of effort to cover the many aspects of it. Any thoughts? CeltBrowne (talk) 22:20, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping, @CeltBrowne, and for your good work in starting the article.

My main thought is that a topic like this is hard work, for lots of reasons, including:

1. people have strong views on it, so it risks attracting POV-pushing edits. It will need careful watching
2. key parts of the story are still emerging, so the shape of the article may be unstable
3. its hard to keep up with the volume of news reports

I can't help because I am v busy right now with other tasks, but I wish you luck. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:35, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks also for the ping. I'd considered starting an article on this subject too, but decided against it as I was/am too busy right now to give it the attention it needs, but I've added it to my watchlist and will edit and add to it as time allows. You've made a good start, well done. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 12:39, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi guys, I've also added it to my watchlist – great work in starting the article, @CeltBrowne! In line with keeping it to a high standard, I'll be watching the style and grammar to make sure it's relatively consistent, and with the barrage of news articles that seem to be coming through every day I'll probably start a local revision to make sure there is a coherence to it. Bearnard O'Riain. (talk) 21:50, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 24 August 2020

Oireachtas Golf Society scandal → ? – "scandal" is POV. Alternatives include Golfgate, 2020 Oireachtas Golf Society dinner, 2020 Oireachtas golf dinner, Oireachtas Golf Society, Oireachtas golf dinner controversy jnestorius^(talk) 15:34, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Support move to Oireachtas Golf Society controversy; the society isn't notable in itself, and none of the other years it held a dinner are notable so disambiguation is unnecessary. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 16:48, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Oppose. The affair has pretty much universally been referred to as a scandal. Compare Garda whistleblower scandal, Renewable Heat Incentive scandal, Windrush scandal, FÁS expenses scandal, Iris Robinson scandal, Cash-for-Honours scandal. Agree that "2020" is redundant. The variants with "dinner" are sub-optimal as the event seems to extended over two days including some rounds of golf. --Kwekubo (talk) 17:11, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

I haven't seen many newspaper articles using the word "scandal" in the title (IT letters page is one); most use "[the] Oireachtas golf [event/dinner]", some use "Golfgate". Many articles may describe it as a scandal, but a description is not a name, and IMO more describe it as a controversy than a scandal. It's too recent for such a strong label as "scandal" to have become canonical. jnestorius^(talk) 18:02, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

"Controversy" is just a milder synonym for "scandal". I dispute that the describer needs to be milder, or that more time needs to pass before the term scandal may be applied. And secondly, I dispute the idea that more sources are referring to it as a "controversy" rather than a "scandal"; The Irish Examiner is referring to as a scandal, the Irish Independent is referring to it as a scandal, Newstalk is referring to it as a scandal, politico.eu is referring to as a scandal, Euronews is referring to it as a scandal, I could go on. These are all serious sources. The gravity of the situation, in which the deputy leader of a major governing party has been forced to resign, the leader of the Senate has been forced to resign, and many other may have to resign, has elevated this above "controversy" and to the level of "scandal" and I believe this is reflected by how the previously mentioned sources are referring to it. Kwekubo has also made a good point that the use of the word "scandal" is not unusual in this context, either in real life or as Wikipedia article names. CeltBrowne (talk) 20:51, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

CeltBrowne, could you sign your contributions above, please?

@Bastun: Whoops, sorry about that, I have a bad habit of forgetting to sign my posts. Corrected now. CeltBrowne (talk) 20:51, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Oppose the removal of the word "scandal": See my reply above. I would also point out that "Golfgate" already redirects to the article, and is acknowledged in the article as an informal name. CeltBrowne (talk) 20:51, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Support move to Golfgate. Rhetoricalnoodle (talk) 19:37, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Oppose Scandal does not cast judgement on the activity, it merely refers to antivity which has illicited a public reaction. I disagree that the wording is inappropriate or even "strong". I only oppose on these grounds. If it is due to "Golfgate" being proven to be more recognised or more standard, I will switch my stance to neutral.Kanjo Kotr (talk) 07:55, 25 August 2020 (UTC)