Jump to content

Talk:Éirígí

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Conghaileach (talk | contribs) at 23:24, 10 July 2011 (→pramilitary links?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Fair use rationale for Image:Eirigi.jpg

Image:Eirigi.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:01, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

pramilitary links?

Any connection with present/former republican paramilitaries? Jdorney (talk) 14:05, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It would seem so

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/radicals-detained-over-ulster-murders-1673387.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.46.240.45 (talk) 00:29, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They responded to that article ay the time. http://www.eirigi.org/latest/latest160309.html — Conghaileach (talk) 23:23, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Labour Party has a good few ex IRA men in its ranks a few are now TDs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.198.221.114 (talk) 13:02, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

éirígí do not have any links with armed Republican groups —Preceding unsigned comment added by Newry Republican (talk • contribs) 13:59, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What is its position on the legitimacy (or otherwise) of "armed struggle" ? 86.112.94.153 (talk) 10:37, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Why not ask them? --Andrensath (talk | contribs) 11:58, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"national colours of Ireland"

This is a POV statement. Only Irish nationalism considers green, white and orange to be the national colours of Ireland. Ironically, a nationalist tag-team of editors is accusing me of being POV for seeking to neutralise the statement. Mooretwin (talk) 08:58, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

:Green and white aren't national colours of Ireland? I wonder why the Irish rugby team and even the northern Irish football team play in those colours then? Strange one that... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.125.35.200 (talk) 12:03, 31 October 2008 (UTC) [reply]

You've just supported my comment. Green and white are a different set of colours than green, white and orange. Thanks. Mooretwin (talk) 12:18, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What are the colours of the Flag of Ireland? Green, white and orange.
Er, that's the flag of the Republic of Ireland: not the whole of Ireland! Mooretwin (talk) 14:35, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's the flag of Ireland. What was éirígí got to do with the whole island of Ireland anyway? In fact the whole island of Ireland isn't even mentioned in the article; so this discussion is pointless. Please look fpr your political discussions elsewhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.125.35.200 (talk) 14:40, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
When you say Flag of Ireland, you are referring to the Republic (i.e. the 26-county state!!) Regardless of what eirigi has got to do with the island of Ireland (and I believe it is an all-Ireland organisation!), it remains the case that stating that the "national colours of Ireland" are green, white and orange is a POV statement. As you've inadvertently conceded yourself, most bodies representing Ireland simply use green (or green and white). Green is accepted universally as the colour to represent Ireland, whereas green, white and orange is nationalist POV. Mooretwin (talk) 14:58, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll leave you here to troll and read your own political POV. What's for sure is that nothing will be changed in the article with rational like that. You fail to comprehend the most basic facts such as the name of a country. Slán.194.125.35.200 (talk) 15:02, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above statement is ad hominem, contravenes WP:AGF and does not address the subject being discussed. If you are unable to put forward a rational argument in favour of retaining the POV statement about the "national colours of Ireland", you should refrain from commenting. You started off supporting my comment, then attempted to remove your comment, demonstrating a complete absence of logic. Mooretwin (talk) 15:06, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

éirígí Alternative Video

I added the following information in relation to an alternative video to x factor's "hero" release. It is perfectly legitimate and relevant material and is fully cited/referenced. It should not be removed on the grounds of "propaganda" as attempted by some british users as it's as neutral/unbiased as the x factor's Help for "heroes" release and doing so would be unfair and potentially libelous to wikipedia as it would indicate bias/censorship.

On the 14th of December 2008, éirígí released an alternative video to the X Factor's "Hero" release on their website.[1] In a statement on their website, the party claimed that "In response to the release of the X Factor’s ‘Hero’ in support of Britain’s occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq éirígí has compiled an alternative video highlighting the true nature of modern day imperialism".[2] The video was removed from various video hosting sites in the days following its release.[3]. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.45.81.139 (talk) 11:06, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Marxist, not just socialist

Rationale:

No original research. O Fenian (talk) 16:29, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Took part in the 2008 World Congress of the International Marxist Tendency[1]
  • effeminate red whimpering about "imperialism".[2]
  • Fawning over dead Marxist, Connolly who was a member of the Second International Cabal with Lenin and Trotsky.[3]
You're welcome. - Yorkshirian (talk) 18:30, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm welcome to say No original research again? O Fenian (talk) 18:37, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome to read the published sources? - Yorkshirian (talk) 19:06, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And none of them say Éirígí are Marxist. O Fenian (talk) 19:11, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If they're not Marxist, why would they take part in the World Congress of the International Marxist Tendency? - Yorkshirian (talk) 19:18, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So you are admitting to drawing your own conclusion based on their attendance? Good, I'll say no original research again then. You're welcome to stop wasting time. O Fenian (talk) 19:19, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why not add into the article that they took part in the World Congress of the International Marxist Tendency? Mooretwin (talk) 19:21, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's sort of mentioned in the article already. O Fenian (talk) 19:27, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
O Fenian, you're welcome to stop negating. Its a bit like saying somebody who attends a Freemasonic Lodge isn't a Freemason. Why do you think Éirígí were there? For the punch bowl and the free sandwiches? They're clearly a Marxist party, participating in international Marxist gatherings, derving their ideology from a Marixst (Connolly) yet somehow you want to, negate all this and keep the very relevent information out of the article. - Yorkshirian (talk) 19:24, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nope. I want you to provide a source, not draw your own conclusions. I'd have thought an editor with your dubious history would understand the importance of sticking to policy. O Fenian (talk) 19:26, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Policy quoted by you? You outright lie about something as plain as can see. What, are we going to argue about whether we exist or not? A Merry Old Soul (talk) 13:02, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]


If it looks like a turd, and smells like a turd, there's no need to pick it up and see if it tastes like a turd. Nor to get the permission of turd-denialists to state that it is in fact a turd, "cited" for turdness or not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.213.238.72 (talk) 09:32, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The way I read it, looking and smelling like a turd isn't enough, someone else must recognise it as a turd and be cited as a reference. It may seem over the top, but some swedes look like turnips... Pollythewasp (talk) 12:21, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ http://www.eirigi.org/latest/latest141208.html
  2. ^ http://www.eirigi.org/latest/latest141208.html
  3. ^ http://ie.indymedia.org/article/90222?userlanguage=ga&save_prefs=true
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Éirígí&oldid=438821293"