Talk:Killiney Castle

Image

Hey @Guliolopez, which image do we use? The initial one seemed to me clearer, since it was head-on. Your picture it is more distant, and looks kind of like a field rather than castle. I don't know.

Also, You could find some references in the directories and other publications, like I have... Orastor (talk) 14:55, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Orastor. Thanks for your note. In terms of the:

• IMAGE - I don't think it's a question of "either/or". There can be several images in an article. In terms of what image should be the first one in the article, I would personally favour an actual photograph. As it is perhaps more representative of what the subject actually looks like. Rather than, say, a subjective (and perhaps not especially representative) 19th century image. I have, FYI, changed to a slightly cropped version of the image - which perhaps contains less sky, less field and more "castle". (FYI - I note that the File:Killiney Castle.jpg image you uploaded to Commons contains a (promotional?) watermark. I'm not sure what that watermark is "for". But consider reading COM:Watermarks#Unacceptable watermarks.)
• REFERENCES - I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "You could find some references in the directories and other publications, like I have", but if you are (for example) referring to the fact that I tagged some statements in the article with tags requesting inline citations, I would refer you to WP:VER and WP:BURDEN. It is not up to me (or any other reader or editor) to search for references in directories or publications. The references (which support the text) should be added to the article by the editor (who adds that text). It perhaps isn't/wasn't your intent, but "go look for refs yourself" isn't in keeping with related norms.
• TAGS - As I have you, you will note that I tagged a few areas as needing additional context and refs. When we say, for example, that the "[obelisk] is in relation to the castle", what do we mean? In relation to it how? Commissioned by one of the castle's owners/occupiers? Built by the same architect/builder? Constructed on the castle's demesne? What? Similarly, when we state that "Killiney Castle was said to have the best sea and land view in Ireland", who is it who said this? (Per MOS:AWW and WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV, subjective opinions should be attributed to someone. Or, at the very least, a book/work - where it is clear that it's a quote.) Hopefully you can also help address the tags I placed on the phrases "it seems [he retained possession]" and "The Vico did not open until 1889". As, absent inline refs, it is not possible to address the clarity issues here. (What is "the Vico"? To whom does "it seem"? I can't, for example, change this to "according to [census/land/busines/historical records], he retained possession" because no inline ref, identifying the record/source is provided)....

Thanks again! Guliolopez (talk) 15:19, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, @Guliolopez for everything. I will try to find some more references, but am unsure how to address the other grammar or unclear sentences. Orastor (talk) 15:36, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Wow, @Guliolopez!! This is amazing, thank you so much! Orastor (talk) 15:55, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi Orastor. In addition to my questions about the basis for the editorial flourishes above ("it seems", "Without a doubt", "said to have") I'm having problems helping clarify/fix some other issues here. For example:

• "In 1870, the accident happened late". What are we talking about here? What accident? Late when? Late in 1870? December 1870? What are we talking about?
• "[Warren's] wealth was wasted on unproductive endeavours". What are we talking about here? What endeavours? Failed investments? Big parties? Building follies? Something else? What?

Can you confirm please what sources these passages are based upon? So others can review and help ensure the text matches the source AND still makes sense. Thanks. Guliolopez (talk) 17:37, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Done. Orastor (talk) 17:51, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Eh. Respectfully I'm not sure those issues are fully addressed.

In terms of the sentence itself ("A large portion of this wealth was wasted on unproductive endeavors, as a major benefactor of the church"), it is unclear what one thing has to do with the other. What's the connection with "being a benefactor of the church" and "wealth was wasted on unproductive endeavors"? Also, still, what are/were the "unproductive endeavors"?

In terms of the source, and per WP:RSPYT, many YouTube videos are self-published and therefore considered WP:UGC. Ideally the YouTuber's original sources would be used instead.

In terms of the change from "It seems" to "It is evident", this hasn't solved the issue at all. Evident based on WHAT? What records/sources? Just stating that something is "evident" or "clear" or whatever falls within the bounds of MOS:OP-ED.

Thanks. Guliolopez (talk) 18:04, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Then I have no idea. I've poured out my knowledge of it, anything further is beyond me. Orastor (talk) 19:42, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Construction

Should clarify here; according to the history article, Talbots of Malahide had the land for 1 Goshawk in 1218 (known and Rochestown Estate?) because they were Nromans, and the crown granted them land on the borders of the Pale. (What is it?)

In 1740 John Malpas claimed the land to build 3 houses on the hill. Orastor (talk) 17:57, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi. RE:

• "the borders of the Pale. (What is it?)". The Pale is The Pale. That part of Ireland (mostly just Dublin and its immediate surrounds) under the control of the English government in the Late Middle Ages. The rest of the country remaining under Hiberno-Norman and/or Gaelic Irish control.
• "Talbots of Malahide had the land [..] in 1218". They may well have. And one of the sources states as much. But, to confirm, there is zero indication the Talbots built anything on it. In the 13th century or otherwise. The National Monuments Service (NMS) and Record of Monuments and Places (RMP) list no prior structures or evidence of prior archaeological remains nearby. The RMP, in particular, often contains trace evidences of early habitation (from castles and forts down to marked stones, bullauns, wells, enclosures, field systems/boundaries, crop marks, kilns, burnt mounds, shell middens, etc). And there is nothing at all indicated for this site. Nothing. Hence we shouldn't be implying a 13th century origin for this house/building. As there is every indication that it was built in a "green field" site.
• "Malpas claimed the land to build 3 houses on the hill". As elsewhere, can you confirm please where you're getting this information from? Absent any reliable/verifiable sources, we can't do anything with it...

Thanks. Guliolopez (talk) 20:10, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

https://killineyhistory.ie/killiney-castle/ Orastor (talk) 20:17, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi. Are you sharing this link to confirm that that's where you got the majority of the text? If so, have you perhaps read WP:NOTMIRROR and WP:CLOP? I will try and address as much as I can. But it's generally not ideal to copy/paste/close-paraphrase almost entirely from a single source.... Guliolopez (talk) 21:08, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi Guliolopez, I host https://killineyhistory.ie/ and write most of the content for the website. I was recently contacted by someone who claims to have written this article but the email provided has bounced back. On a cursory look much of what appears is a paraphrase of what I have written based on my original research which was painstaking and extensive. There are a number of glaring errors here and the most obvious error is that the photograph shown is not of Killiney Castle. It appears that anywhere 'citation needed' is shown should be attributed to Michael McShane www.killineyhistory.ie I did the piece on Bourchier's listing in the Tithe Applotment Books. I also wrote the piece about Warren Junior and his Wyvern connection. References 4,9,14,19 should be attributed to 'Michael McShane www.killineyhistory.ie'. I have not gone through the piece in great detail but it is likely that much has been lifted from not only my article but other online sources also. If you require any further information please let me know. Michael McShane Cavantownlands (talk) 17:14, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Cavantownlands/Michael. Thanks for your note. RE:

• "most obvious error is that [..] photograph". The infobox image came from this Geograph entry. Where the uploader mapped and labelled it as "Fitzpatrick Castle Hotel, Killiney". On review, however, it appears to be a mislabelled/misidentified/mismapped image of Malahide Castle. I have removed it.
• "a number of glaring errors here". Feel free to point them out specifically. With quotes from the problematic text. As needed. So that other editors can assist with any review/corrections.
• "much of what appears is a paraphrase of what I have written". In honesty that was my concern. The adding editor appears to have (only very slightly) reworded the text from the killineyhistory.ie website. Which is likely why they could not answer questions about context, background or original sources. As they hadn't read them. And, oddly for an editor contributing on very specific areas of Dublin history, didn't seem to know what the Pale was/is. In honesty, and depending on your input on the "[other] glaring errors" above, and absent other thoughts, I'm inclined to largely excise most of the WP:COPYVIO/WP:CLOP material. (That said, if you'd like to see the content retained, please consider reviewing the guidelines on "donating" materials/content to Wikipedia.)
• "4,9,14,19 should be attributed to Michael McShane www.killineyhistory.ie". I will take a look.

Thanks. Guliolopez (talk) 19:56, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

@Cavantownlands: I've addressed the image problem, and attempted to address some of the referencing and attribution issues. Did you have any specific thoughts on the "glaring errors" (and CLOP issues)? If not, I'll try and address myself. Mainly (in all honesty) by excising and summarising large tracts of the text? (Which, without your input, might be more aggressive than it otherwise needs to be...) Thanks. Guliolopez (talk) 16:27, 15 February 2024 (UTC)