Talk:Derry

Note to editors: the agreed compromise for the Derry/Londonderry name dispute is that the city page shall be titled Derry and the county page shall be titled County Londonderry.

Northern Ireland as a country

There is an interesting discussion on the Northern Ireland WP suggesting that it is not a country with some pretty compelling evidence. Just thinking should Northern Ireland be removed and have the page say 'Derry is a city in the United Kingdom'. thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.114.44.201 (talk) 09:02, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

It is a city in Northern Ireland and the United Kingdom. Even if Northern Ireland is just a province, the city would still be in Northern Ireland. Articles on American cities tend to mention their state rather than the USA as whole in the introduction. BritishWatcher (talk) 09:08, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

To cite an incorrect Wikipedia source is just plain silly and shows just how bad theis "encyclopedia" is. There is no suc city as "Derry", Cities in the UK have charters and the name does not exist in the list! The City of Londonderry exists. I perceive mischief amongst many editors. Wikipedia is an unreliable source as it is too easily manipulated. Acorn897 (talk) 02:10, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

This must be a troll. 15:11, 14 December 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.159.17.137 (talk)

To reword a statement, to improve the article's neutrality

Before my amendment, the sentence I updated had begun "While the city is more usually known as Derry,". I tested this sentence by using Google.ie ( Google Ireland) to search for derry city and also londonderry city - the term derry city was more common. I then used Google.co.uk to search both derry city and londonderry city, and londonderry city had more search results. It appears to me that the city might more usually be known as Derry within the Republic of Ireland but more commonly known as Londonderry with the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. So, to enhance the article's neutrality, I have reworded the sentence to begin "While the city is known as both Londonderry and Derry ..." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Torquil Sorensen (talk • contribs) 06:47, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Given the history on this page, any change to the use of Derry and Londonderry should be discussed before a change is made, so I have reverted. As I remember it the current wording came from a third party source not an google search. --Snowded ^TALK 06:50, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

The change made appears to be original research. I agree with the reversion. O Fenian (talk) 09:18, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Agree with the revert. Consensus. --HighKing (talk) 10:19, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Who'd like to discuss names?

I took a look at the Derry name compromise thingy and it seems old and with sod all editors looking at it.

So I've created a new one. Here's my "advert" for it:

Derry

86.178.52.148 (talk) 19:39, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

I've deactivated the Category this template places pages in, it's messing with the helpme feature. Please note that placing this "advert" on pages is a violation of WP:CANVAS. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 20:26, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

TBH, an RM should be held on this article. Derry is the name of the city council, not the city itself. GoodDay (talk) 18:49, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

I disagree with Giftiger Wunsch's opinion that the placing of the advert on this page at least contravenes the canvassing policy. The advertisement does not attempt to influence the result of the discussion.GSTQ (talk) 21:51, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Actually it is a totally unbiased advertisment. Its no different to someone asking for comments with plain old text. It even has a slightly funny intro: "Do you want a London with that Derry?". How can you call this canvassing unless its canvassing both sides! Mabuska ^(talk) 22:18, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Just noticed this. Thanks, I never did understand what was supposed to be biased about it. Egg Centric (talk) 02:13, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 81.145.165.2, 8 February 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} Noteable people please add

Deigh Reid - Actor

81.145.165.2 (talk) 09:14, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Do you have a source that shows this person as being notable? Mabuska ^(talk) 12:59, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

On the subject of notability, when I look at nominations for "notable" people, I first check if they've got an article here. After that, I check to see if by way of their occupation or job, they qualify as the holders of a notable position or title. Failing that, I quickly Google for something notable. Unfortunately, I can't find anything that leads me to believe that Deigh is notable. I've also removed him from the "List of people from Derry" article. --HighKing (talk) 17:56, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. -Atmoz (talk) 01:12, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Derry/Londonderry name dispute, Wikipedia

on the Derry/Londonderry name dispute page I was thinking of putting how the wikipedia guidelines work in the same way how the BBC guidelines are there. Any comments? C. 22468 (talk) 11:46, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

I understand statements in Wikipedia need references to support them. What reference is used to support the statement in p1 that the city is more usually known as Derry? There isn't a reference. It is more usually known as that amongst Irish / catholic / republicans. It is more usually known as Londonderry amongst Protestants / Ulster and in the non-Irish world - the BBC calls it Londonderry. Explain this difference and don't pretend. 86.129.5.187 (talk) 11:55, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Please see multiple previous discussions --Snowded ^TALK 11:59, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

I am not on about how the pages are I was on about how the Guidlines are and I was thinking of putting something like this in on the Derry/Londonderry name dispute for the Responses to the dispute section. and I wanted to see what people though first.

Wikipedia

Derry for the city and County Londonderry for the County. Other things such as Londonderry Port and Derry GAA follow their official names.

C. 22468 (talk) 17:11, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Londonderry should be used as it's within the United Kingdom. That the name offends anybody, is irrelevant. GoodDay (talk) 14:52, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

I am not on about what the pages are called I wanted to just put the Wikipedia guidelines on the Derry/Londonderry name dispute#Response to the dispute because the BBC, Guardian and The Times style guides are there so why not the Wikipedia ones? C. 22468 (talk) 17:47, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Do you have any reliable sources? O Fenian (talk) 17:48, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Other than Wikipedia no but may be able to possibly find some, Is it worth doing though? C. 22468 (talk) 17:52, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

there is Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Ireland-related articles), its what most media things use in that part and can't find anything on the Internet. C. 22468 (talk) 19:03, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

For the love of God Almighty, it's Londonderry - not Derry. It's within the UK. 109.255.108.147 (talk) 18:03, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

and as it never happened why is the wikipedia article named Derry? For example most people call "Newcastle upon Tyne" Newcastle , yet the wikipedia article uses its official and legal name. If it didn't the encyclopedia would be unreliable. so if it happens there why not here? the sentence "more usually called derry" will just annoy the heck out of unionists and that is bound to start a fight on here. The articles you have produced are original work which in themselves show no research or ways to backup their claims, its just opinions! I could write an article now on how the city is more commonly known as londonderry and post it on here and it would be down as unquestionable fact! I'm starting to think I'd be getting more reliable information from unencyclopedia! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.242.109.42 (talk) 19:32, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

"While the city is more usually known as Derry" who says?

I don't get where this information is coming from, should the sentence not be "While the city is more usually known as Derry in the nationalist community" or something similar. Logically everyone in the UK would call it Londonderry and 3/5 of people in Ireland would call it Derry so it would be more commonly known as Londonderry. Not like i'm taking sides, i really don't care but its just little things like that that bug me. What do you guys think? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.15.114.233 (talk) 16:41, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

There are two sources given in the article itself. IRWolfie- (talk) 21:26, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

where? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.242.109.144 (talk) 11:02, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Right next to the statement, as you could easily have found out for yourself. --Snowded ^TALK 11:14, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Oh I see that now I didn't realize that source covered the whole paragraph, but not only was that source written in 2006, it is no longer available so maybe the information should be updated/removed? it's just a proper encyclopedia would not link to such things especially if it is only from one source and out of date. No other sourced cooborate this one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.242.107.250 (talk) 10:41, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I am not sure which source you are referring to. O Fenian (talk) 15:47, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, the source referring to the city being more commonly called derry is 5 years out of date and no longer online so I think any information relying on that source should be changed or removed, unless of course another source backs it up if not then wikipedia is obviously not a reliable source of information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.242.110.68 (talk) 23:01, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I refer you back to my comment of 15:47, 17 May 2011. O Fenian (talk) 23:04, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Like it says in the title: "While the city is more usually known as Derry, Londonderry is also used and remains the legal name." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.146.91.81 (talk) 00:31, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

I think the IP made a good suggestion in "While the city is more usually known as Derry in the nationalist community" as that is more accurate and verifiable with more sources. However looking at the article the "more usually" bit is unreferenced at the moment and without a source is potentially dubious so i've added a dubious tag. Mabuska ^(talk) 12:02, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Try reading the article, in particular the second paragraph of Derry#Name. O Fenian (talk) 12:03, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

For such a contentious sentence the reference should also be added to it and not left in another paragraph outside the lede altogether. That is only asking for problems. Anyways would it not be better to neutralise the sentence altogether by amending it to the following: The city is commonly known as both Derry and Londonderry, with the latter being the legal name.? Mabuska ^(talk) 12:08, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Derry is the common name, according to reliable sources. You do not get to change that to suit your own point-of-view because you disagree. O Fenian (talk) 12:09, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

And what would really be a good idea is for the IP to make themselves clear. "Oh I see that now I didn't realize that source covered the whole paragraph, but not only was that source written in 2006, it is no longer available so maybe the information should be updated/removed" seems to refer to nothing in particular, since none of the sources for that sentence appear to be from 2006 and they are all still available. I have asked for clarification on this repeatedly, to no success. O Fenian (talk) 12:13, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Its also commonly known as Londonderry as well. Neither is an obscure or minority term for neither to be not common. Mabuska ^(talk) 13:26, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Let's steer away from opinion. Show me the sources. Have you any source that states it is commonly known as Londonderry? --HighKing (talk) 20:50, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

The 'common name' guideline (always potentially problematic) should never supersede Sovereignty anyway, so which-ever is ultimately 'most-used' should be irrelevant. There is endless space on Wikipedia to explain/complain/maintain all the facts. It should be Londonderry, with the usual Wikipedia explanations: It's the only stable basis to work from. Otherwise it's a never-ending dispute. This is one of the central issues in the whole UK/IRE problem, and I feel that issues like this prevent others from being resolved.

I think it's time to accept (with all the will in the world) that these kind-of unofficial compromise (as they are often called) rarely if ever work on Wikipedia. The proof of this will forever fill the discussion pages until issues of national status on WP are properly resolved.

This article is simply mistitled. Sovereignty plus explanation - it's the only thing that makes proper sense. Matt Lewis (talk) 23:37, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Wholeheartedly agree. The city is in the United Kingdom & its name is Londonderry, which is what this article title should be. GoodDay (talk) 03:13, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps some don't see it as a related issue, but this same argument was used, and failed, to locate "Republic of Ireland" at "Ireland". But I also see Sovereignty plus explanation as the only thing that makes proper sense. Also related is Republic of the Union of Myanmar which is at "Burma". --HighKing (talk) 00:43, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

We have a long standing stable position which is supported by references in which we use "Derry" for the city and "Londonderry" for the county. If we opt for all Londonderry or all Derry then there will more extensive "never ending disputes" to quote Matt.--Snowded ^TALK 06:45, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

If it is built into a guideline? How do you actually know this? I'm not sure it's right to be so negative about that. Wikipedia for me cannot properly stand up on compromises like these. If there was a solid guideline stating that sovereignty comes first in cases like these (with explanations after etc) - perhaps starting with IMOS - than disruption over it (and certainly edit warring) would lead to more authoritative forms admin interaction. At the moment Northern Ireland is treated like some kind of 'special case' - but it needn't be at all. Make it normal article and let the thing breathe I say. Matt Lewis (talk) 06:56, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Its open to you to see if the community wants to impose a guideline, but for the moment it hasn't. Taking a position that supports one side in what is a difficult issue with a few hundred years of conflict behind it seems to me to be a mistake. --Snowded ^TALK 07:23, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Instead of talking about it I really should put something together - I'll never get the kind of encouragement I'm obviously looking for. For me, the hundreds of years of conflict (as you put it - and is it allowed to ever end I wonder?) has got nothing to do with Wikipedia, outside of the standard historical presentation of it. Irish nationalism is like the spoilt child of Wikipedia in my opinion - it's time to tell it in no uncertain terms that it is just an opinion and nothing 'special' at all. That message alone makes this worth doing - in fact it is central to all the UK/IRE problems: some people think Irish nationalism has a right to 'first line' status everywhere, including the first-line-footnote of the United Kingdom article.

It simply has to stop, Snowded: for all this to be first-line stuff (and even titular in this case) is pure POV, and totally against the WP:NPOV policy. I'm not saying "take this out of Wikipedia", I'm just saying "play by the basic rules - they are perfectly sound, and there for a reason." Matt Lewis (talk) 07:47, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Lets leave the Derry/Londonderry consensus out of this as this issue has nothing to do with that. To steer this conversation back on track to the issue i've raised to do with the original issue - it appears to be an agenda to plant a POV as superior by sticking "While the city is more usually known as Derry,[5][6] Londonderry is also used and remains the legal name." in the lede despite the fact its commonly called both sourced or not. Whilst i proposed a neutral form, i wonder is there even a need for it at all? At the most basic it repeats what the first line of the lede states - that its known as Londonderry and Derry.

As a side-note the source used for the first reference for "more usually known as" i would call dubious as erroneously the same paragraph that statement is taken from says Unionists wish to remain under the English crown - its not the English crown but British especially since the merger of the three kingdoms. Also when you look at the introduction for it [1], it states Ireland's size is 32,600 sq. miles, however its actually 32,595.1 sq. miles. Whilst this is only a pathetic 4.9 sq. mile difference and a round-up by the source, its still inaccurate. So how can this source be taken as fully reliable when it can't even be specifically accurate?

If you want to claim a source is unreliable for the heinous crime of rounding up, then I laugh at you. Are you planning to invalidate every source that says six million Jews were killed in the Holocaust, because the number is not accurate unless exactly six million were killed? Are all these source unreliable because they say "Queen of England"? O Fenian (talk) 22:12, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

The Derry Journal can also hardly be called a non-biased source and what evidence do they have to back up their claim? Its hardly academic either as it also depends on the viewpoint of the editors, who make clear they believe the name of city to be Derry. Two dubious sources for a contentious sentence - surely something more concrete and academic would be better?

@ Matt and GoodDay - can we keep this to this topic please rather than the overall problem? This isn't the right place for it anyways. Mabuska ^(talk) 13:19, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

The city is Londonderry, the city-council is Derry. That anybody would be offended if this article was moved to its correct title, is irrelevant. GoodDay (talk) 13:41, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

I agree with you GoodDay however that is off-topic to this specific issue. Mabuska ^(talk) 13:46, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

The city is known equally as Londonderry & Derry. Atleast, that seems to be what created the city/county compromise. GoodDay (talk) 13:47, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

I've only ever heard it called Londonderry. (92.20.47.130 (talk) 18:04, 22 May 2011 (UTC)) (sockpuppet of banned editor HarveyCarter)

Don't get out much, huh? --HighKing (talk) 11:39, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Failing someone providing a proper rationale that backs up the reliability of the two sources, or supplies a reliable academic source for something that is quite possibly contentious, then they and the sentence should be removed. Mabuska ^(talk) 20:51, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

The sources are reliable, it is your comedic attempts to say otherwise that are questionable. O Fenian (talk) 22:13, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Comment on the content not the editor O Fenian. Do i just take your word that they are reliable? I'm afraid more proof is needed than just your word O Fenian. Rather than trying to downplay the valid questions, insult me, and not even attempt to prove the sources reliability - you could actually try to justify their reliability. It would be a lot simpler and quicker to ending the discussion than what you responded with. Mabuska ^(talk) 22:24, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

I already have. If you want to try and get consensus to change Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources to include a clause that every single source that rounds a figure up or down is not reliable at all, you go right ahead. When (LMAO) you have consensus to do that, I will agree the source is not reliable per Wikipedia guidelines. O Fenian (talk) 23:04, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Maybe adding the response down here rather than up above would make it easier to show you've actually posted a somewhat odd and poor defense of them. You still ignore the points i made on the newspaper. Are you going to continue with insults on editors?

On the link you provide, "Queen of England" is not the same as "English crown". Queen of England isn't inaccurate as she is queen of England (and Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland), however that is not the same as the English crown. Always trying to deflect the issue down a path to back up your own claims. Instead of such tactics and the continued insults on an editor, why can't you just be civil and assume good faith in your posts. Mabuska ^(talk) 11:19, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Would anybody happen to have the date, when Londonderry changed its name to Derry? GoodDay (talk) 23:13, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

It's comments like those that get you into trouble GoodDay. --HighKing (talk) 00:43, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

It's a stinging question to some, but it does cut through the baloney. GoodDay (talk) 00:52, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

No. It's low level disruption, pushing one single POV and no attempt to give weight to any others. It's an attempt to shut down other POVs by pushing a "single truth", and then repeating your point over and over and over. This is a problem. --HighKing (talk) 10:29, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

You're boring me. GoodDay (talk) 15:40, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Keep it to the topic GoodDay please. And to answer your question there is no date for the city as its never happened. Mabuska ^(talk) 11:19, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Cool. GoodDay (talk) 15:40, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

and as it never happened why is the wikipedia article named Derry? For example most people call "Newcastle upon Tyne" Newcastle , yet the wikipedia article uses its official and legal name. If it didn't the encyclopedia would be unreliable. so if it happens there why not here? the sentence "more usually called derry" will just annoy the heck out of unionists and that is bound to start a fight on here. The articles you have produced are original work which in themselves show no research or ways to backup their claims, its just opinions! I could write an article now on how the city is more commonly known as londonderry and post it on here and it would be down as unquestionable fact! I'm starting to think I'd be getting more reliable information from unencyclopedia! Just looking at your name o Fenian, and I'm starting to wonder if you are really impartial.

Can't believe this is still going on...Ha! I think the only compromise is to pretend that the Siege of Derry never happened and that the London Bridgade never arrrived. That being the case the city should be called 'Derry' and the County should be called 'Coleraine'. Although if the London Bridgade had not arrived the city would not be standing today.Homebirdni (talk) 08:53, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Ireland For Dummies

Heres a more descriptive arguement for O Fenian to try to contest:

The Ireland For Dummies says this: Unionists (who wish to remain under the English crown) called it... in the same section it claims Derry is more commonly used.

1. Firstly the English crown hasn't existed since 1707 when the crowns of England and Scotland were merged. Unionists (Scottish/English ones) couldn't exist until the first act of union which came into being when the English crown ceased to exist. Irish Unionists not until the Act of Union between Ireland and Great Ireland. If this source was reliable it'd have stated "British crown".
2. Secondly generally speaking Unionists are pro-monarchy, however not all are and that is not the definition of a Unionist. A Unionist is someone who wishes to retain the legislative union with the United Kingdom. Whether they are a monarchist or not is irrelevant. Hence the source is unreliable in its description of a Unionist.
3. Thirdly as this section of the source makes these two horrendous errors that have no basis at all, how can its claim in the same section that Derry is the most commonly used name be accepted as reliable?
4. Fourthly no source is provided to show how they have come to their conclusion that is more commonly known as one or the other.

In the same source i noted here it states the island of Ireland's size as being 32,600 sq. miles, when its actually 32,595.1 sq. miles. Whilst this is only a pathetic 4.9 sq. mile difference and a round-up by the source, its still inaccurate.

1. O Fenian claims that we say 6 million Jews died in the Holocaust, and round-ups can't be considered unreliable or something like that. Does that mean that this source is reliable and that i can go to the Ireland article and argue that the size of Ireland should be changed to what this source states? Probably not. Why not? Because other sources contradict it giving an actual precise and accurate number - thus its unreliable in that regard.

If its makes such mistakes in one section, how many does it make throughout the rest of the book? It doesn't provide a figure that's accruate enough to use on Wikipedia when other sources contradict it. How can this be a reliable source? Is that laughable and comedic enough O Fenian? Or can you actually answer those questions without diverting it down a different path, i.e. instead of "English crown" you focus on "Queen of England" which has absolutely no bearing on this at all.

Mabuska ^(talk) 21:29, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

As I said above, if you want to change the guideline to include your proposed clause go right ahead. I will enjoy watching you getting laughed off the page. The rest has already been covered or is barely worth covering, the bottom line is you do not like what the source says so you are wikilawyering. Change the guideline, or change the record. O Fenian (talk) 22:49, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Great sourcing Mabuska. And again great dodging O_Fenian. Bravo! I think the guideline to go by is that if O_Fenian sources a reference then it is deemed reliable. Anything other than this is an attempt to push a POV. Could be wrong but that seems to be the trend.Homebirdni (talk) 09:10, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Verifiability not truth. Mo ainm~Talk 09:19, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

I could easily provide two more sources as well, if anyone wants to continue this farce. O Fenian (talk) 09:25, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Straws and clutching come to mind. Mo ainm~Talk 09:27, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

I'd agree, but this is what O_Fenian has come to. We all get it now...Sources provided by O_Fenian are reliable. Lets just leave it at that.Homebirdni (talk) 09:31, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Let's tone down the sarcasm. A quick scan on Google Books indicates a number of other sources that all say the city is known as Derry, or commonly known as Derry. I can't find anything (other than a single work of fiction called The Bleeding Hills) that states that the city is commonly known as Londonderry. If editors have a problem with a reference such as "Ireland for Dummies", it seems that other references can be found (and a quick scan would have revealed that to anybody who cared to look). But if people have a problem with the statement itself and the inclusion in this article, that's a different matter and comes back to policies and the current guidelines. If that's what this discussion is really about, let's not mix the two separate issues together, or argue backwards. --HighKing (talk) 10:47, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

look this is what i boils down to - o fenian is obviously bias - his name coming from the group who wanted an irish republic, so therefore he is going to want everything in this article to be pro nationalist - which he is succeeding in doing by quoting articles that yes say the city is more commonly known as Derry but are not based on anything but opinion, but lets say he is right ,he has yet to counter my argument - even though Newcastle upon Tyne is more commonly referred to as Newcastle - and as wikipedia is a reliable encyclopedia the article is labeled with its less common but official name "Newcastle Upon Tyne" so why is the same not done here? regardless on who it annoys an encyclopedia is supposed to quote 100% fact, not unreliable opinions or creating compromises so they don't annoy other people! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.146.81.95 (talk) 11:16, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

"Why is the same not done here"? Because there is a large group of Irish nationalists on Wikipedia, and numbers count. Mooretwin (talk) 11:31, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Don't be silly. This isn't an encyclopedia. This is PRIMETIME POV Live!Homebirdni (talk) 11:34, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

BUT NUMBERS SHOULDN'T! its an encyclopedia and should only quote fact! so what are you basically saying? that if there were a lot of people on here that wanted to call The UK englandville it would be allowed? BS I can now see why wikipedia has got a bad name for itself with real experts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.146.81.95 (talk) 12:55, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

It seems to be that way. Its all down to numbers. Doesn't matter if you have a reliable source. If you make 4 edits and 4 users against you make 1 edit each. You are in breach of 3RR and can be blocked even if you are right. Best not to argue with O___Fenian. He probably has more friends than you.Homebirdni (talk) 13:43, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Just a friendly reminder to the anon IP above, but using an editors nationality as the basis for motive or behaviour is racist and a serious (blockable) offense. Even agreeing with editors who make the remarks can also be deemed blockable. Just saying... As I've said above, if editors disagree with the reference, I believe other reliable references exist and the article can be edited to include the substitute source. If editors want to change the guidelines, that's a different matter and I suggest that the discussion is best opened at WP:IMOS. --HighKing (talk) 16:50, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

HighKing, I have no clue what you are talking about. I don't think anything above could be construde as racist. And to suggest that is extremely petty. And to follow it up with the threat of blocking is worse still. Just wise up. I understand that knowing that someone is a nationalist POV pusher and saying it are two things that should not come together on wikipedia. But if someone calls themselves 'Nazi4Life', it is safe to assume that they are not Jewish and maybe pro...And the same can be said for the mentioned user. When you choose a name like O-Fenian, people are going to make assumptions, but don't assume those assumptions to be an act of racism.

As for the topic, it is a numbers game. Jesus could of turned water into buckfast in Londonderry and have 4 books of the bible dictate this, and still this page name would not be changed, due to certain users with POVs to push. Thats just the way it is.Homebirdni (talk) 17:01, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Homebirdni, I also have no clue as to what you're talking about. But making comments like o fenian is obviously bias - his name coming from the group who wanted an irish republic, so therefore he is going to want everything in this article to be pro nationalist is not acceptable. As to threats of blocking - please point them out. I was simply trying to defuse the bickering and get the discussion back to content, not on editors. And I suggest you avoid bring Nazi analogies into discussions. If you like, try addressing the points I raised about sources. Otherwise, this discussion should be moved to IMOS to discuss the guidelines. --HighKing (talk) 18:03, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

I assure that having reviewed a number of O Fenians posts, he harbours an Irish nationalist pov. To say that is not racist so again don't be soo petty. And ill use what ever analogies I see fit. As for the topic, this needs to be moved. David Beckham is sometimes known as 'goldenballs'. By the same rationale used here his page should be changed to reflect that ignoring his name. Just because some overly sensitive users find it offensive is not enough of a reason to change the citys official name.Homebirdni (talk) 18:32, 25 May 2011 (UTC)