Talk:Blarney Stone

Ireland Start‑class Low‑importance

	Ireland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland 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.IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject IrelandTemplate:WikiProject IrelandIreland articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Let's get this article into decent shape

I agree with almost all of the criticisms documented below. The article currently does little more than recycle vague touristy talk about "legends", and does little to illuminate an understanding of the stone itself. The unsourced speculation about Queen Elizabeth and the etymology of "blarney" seems unsupportable by the historical record.

I've added a section on "Ritual", underscoring its location and the difficulty of kissing it. Next up, I'd like to see "History" and "Legend" put into separate sections. Perhaps another section on purported "fragments" of the stone, such as the one in Austin, Texas?-- P L E A T H E R _talk 18:01, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pissing on the Blarney Stone

Viking880 10:42, 29 December 2005 (UTC) Is there some actual proof of locals desecrating the stone, or is this a little bit of Blarney in itself?[reply]

If you google "blarney stone" piss you find many people saying that they themselves urinate(d) on it or have Irish friends who claim to have done so. I would bet that even if it was a bit of Blarney in the beginning that it has now taken on a life of its own and inspired people to actually do it. Danguyf 12:12, 26 January 2006

The gift of the gab bestowed is really the gift of flattery (irish plamas) rather than eloquence . This is where Wikipedia seems to fail. What exactly do we need to produce as evidence that people do, in fact, piss on that Blarney stone? I mean, I myself did it while living in Ireland for two years doing networking work. However, the fact that I can give a first hand account of myself specifically having done it, along with several friends, is going to be cited as 'original research', right? So what next? Does it need to be mentioned in a travel guide or in the Harvard Business Review or the Guardian? This isn't nonsensical or jokey opinion being posted. It's friggin' fact. The fact that someone feels a citation is required here is just lunacy. As is the fact that people keep trying to delete the line. IT'S TRUE! 24.62.27.66 05:48, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Generally yes, something does need to appear in print to be included in Wikipedia. Remember, "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth." (from WP:V). --TeaDrinker 05:51, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's the most genuinely disheartening thing I've ever read. No wonder Wikipedia gets mocked more and more in popular culture. 24.62.27.66 05:57, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The obvious solution here is to take a picture of yourself doing it then upload it. Duh! Utils 19:52, 13 August 2006 (UTC) A snopes link.Utils 20:05, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'd like to see that, given that the castle grounds are locked when the castle is closed to the public and the rest of the time there are people there! Rickogorman 17:08, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Urban legend vs. fact

It seems to me that some of the discussion here misses the point. While it's not permissible for the article to say that locals do piss on the Stone unless this has been published in some reliable source, it is certainly clear that there exists an urban legend about locals pissing on the Blarney Stone. The article can, and should, mention that since the existence of the urban legend is sufficiently well-supported to meet Wikipedia's criteria.

Regarding 24.62.27.66's comments above: Actually, one person's experience of having peed on the thing is not all that important. It would be pretty surprising, especially given the existence of the legend, if somebody hadn't peed on the thing at some point. It wouldn't be hard at all for anyone who works there to do, after closing time (or before opening time). It's not really worth mentioning in the article, though, unless it's a regular occurrence.--Srleffler 20:58, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Queen Elizabeth and Blarney

This story is prima facie flawed. Why would QE say someone was giving her "a lot of blarney" if the legend of the stone did not already exist? The Blarney Castle webpage gives a cleaner acccount, suggesting that McCarthy was giving her "Blarney". (Though even this story seems lacking.)--Rickogorman 17:16, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's also not clear to me why the owner of the castle would have stuck the Stone up under the battlements there, nor how we know that the one tourists are encouraged to kiss is actually the right one. It looks like all the other stones along the bottom of the battlements to me.--Srleffler 21:00, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kissing method

I'd like to see some information about how and why you're meant to kiss it in that awkward position. Gemfyre 06:57, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Other Stones

Surely there are Blarney knock-offs. If anyone knows of tourist attractions similar to the Blarney Stone (stones that you are supposed to kiss for some reason), I feel the article should have a list of them. --Kainaw ^(talk) 13:32, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The town of Shamrock, TX claims to have a fragment of the Blarney Stone. There is a monument and plenty of tourist information on this, is it enough to list it here? 71.164.160.112 (talk) 14:11, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How come?

Blarney Castle originally dates from before AD 1200. It was destroyed in 1446. That's according to the Castle article.
This Blarney Stone articles says "The stone was set into a tower of the castle in 1446."
So, was the stone set in the tower just before the tower was destroyed? How di it get back years later into the new castle?
Or is this "history" all Blarney? (Sarah777 19:40, 18 September 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Bannockburn too late

The Stone of Destiny was taken from Scotland in 1296, the Battle of Bannockburn was not faught until 1314 - so the bit of Rock the Bruce gave to the Irish could not have been from the same stone. Also, are there any sources for Irish aid at Bannockburn? I've never come across any source mentioning Irish at the battle at all - Donnachadh mac Alasdair.