Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ireland

Irish Wikipedians' notice board
Home Irish Wikipedians' related news	Discussion Ireland related discussion (at WikiProject Ireland).	Active Users Active Irish Users	WikiProjects Irish WikiProjects	Stubs Major Irish stubs	Peer review Articles on Peer review	FA Articles on FA review	FA Drive Articles under consideration for FA drive

Irish articles assessed by quality

FA	A	GA	B	C	Start	Stub	FL	List	Category	Disambig	Draft	File	Portal	Project	Redirect	Template	NA	???	Total
64	0	239	1,421	5,365	30,175	26,958	8	3,275	25,890	179	96	175	26	20	2,475	3,149	23	191	99,729

Template:County Dublin

Why is it that Template:County Antrim says "Places in Country Antrim", Template:County Carlow says "Places in Country Carlow", and Template:County Cork says "Places in Country Cork", but Template:County Dublin says "Divisions of the former county of Dublin"? And why does Template:County Dublin not include places such as Tallaght, Templeogue, Ballsbridge, Clontarf, Raheny and so on, like the other county templates? Scolaire (talk) 20:34, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Because as far as @Laurel Lodged is concerned there isn't a place called Co. Dublin anymore because there is now four councils. This argument was had before. Finnegas (talk) 09:10, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ireland/Archive_16#GAA_club_championships_categories Just to jog editors meomeries of all the "fun" that was had bak in 2013 when I vigorously made the same point as Scolaire. Finnegas (talk) 09:37, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

This is correct. Dublin is a former county and was replaced in 1993 by the counties of Dún Laoghaire–Rathdown, Fingal, and South Dublin. The places of the counties are listed in Template:Dún Laoghaire–Rathdown, Template:South Dublin and Template:Fingal. Spleodrach (talk) 12:45, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

@Spleodrach, Finnegas, and Scolaire: I am coming to the discussion a bit late, but just wanted to note that it is not entirely true to say, as Spleodrach did, that Dublin is a former county.

It was indeed abolished in 1992 as a local govt area, but it remains in use for other state-derived purposes which include vehicle registration and the land registry. There may be more official uses which I am unaware of, or maybe not. But there are certainly many informal uses.

I think that current structure of the Template:County Dublin works OK, but I just wanted to stress that the legal situation isn't as clearcut as some assume.

Further muddiness is illustrated by Scolaire's initial example of Template:County Antrim. All 6 counties in Norniron were abolished for local govt purposes by the Local Government Act (Northern Ireland) 1972 and the Local Government (Boundaries) Act (Northern Ireland) 1971. However, like County Dublin, they retain some uses, including Lieutenancy areas and vehicle registration.

My own experience of Norniron is that that the counties are still used as the primary informal geographical divisions. I have never had anyone tell me that they are from Newry and Mourne or Newry, Mourne and Down. People will identify location by county or by town/village, as far as I can see neither the 1972–2015 districts nor the post-2015 districts have supplanted the counties as commonly-used geographical divisions.

Obviously my anecdotal observations are in no way a reliable source, but checking confirms my experience. See e.g. this Gnews search for "County Tyrone". The news media are still using the counties.

And then there are Rural districts. For local govt purposes, they were abolished over 90 years ago, by the Local Government Act 1925. However, they continue to be used for statistical purposes and for defining constituencies: see e.g. the Electoral (Amendment) (Dáil Constituencies) Act 2017. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 03:28, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your input, BHG. You expanded my point about County Antrim, which I probably should have done in the first place. Template:County Antrim does not say "former county of Antrim", and there exists no template for Newry, Mourne and Down, or any other Northern Ireland district. In this context, "Dublin is a former county" is not a useful statement. Templates should have consistency. The Dublin template should have the same wording as the Antrim template, since they have the same legal, historical and usage status. It also shouldn't say "Divisions of", since four of the eight entries are not divisions. The template situation in Dublin is messy; we not only have Template:Fingal, Template:South Dublin and Template:Dún Laoghaire–Rathdown, but also Template:Dublin residential areas, which is not divided by "county", but instead into "Northside" and "Southside", and is in Category:Dublin (city) navigational boxes, despite the fact that many of the places in it are not in the Dublin City Council area. Articles have one or other template chosen arbitrarily, or no template at all.

I'll leave it to the template buffs to discuss what each template should contain and where it should be used, but the wording on the County Dublin template should go back to "Places in Country Dublin", unless and until the wording of other templates changes. Scolaire (talk) 10:26, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Also pinging Laurel Lodged, because he is involved in editing the County Dublin template. Scolaire (talk) 10:28, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Both positions are correct: Dublin is a former county (as is Antrim); both live on in popular culture & memory with vestigial ties to informal organisations (e.g. club orgaisations or car plate registrations). I don't think that there is a need to make the Antrim part of the template replicate the Dublin part, firstly because the successor entities in Antrim are not counties (unlike Fingal) and secondly the successor entities are not co-terminous with the parent entity. For example Newry, Mourne and Down District Council might have to be listed in 3 traditional counties. So the template should stay as is IMHO. Laurel Lodged (talk) 18:22, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

You mean, the County Antrim template should stay as is. I agree fully. But there is no good reason to call County Dublin a "former county" when we don't call the six counties of Northern Ireland that. All 32 counties of Ireland are counties in the same sense. Fingal etc. are counties in a slightly different sense, hence they are not called "County x" in their template or in their article. Whether they are "coterminous with the parent entity" or not is neither here nor there. The heading for the 32 county templates should be consistent. Scolaire (talk) 14:45, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

TD and Senator images

Just came across this copyright notice on the Oireachtas website. It seems to be basically saying "feel free to use the images herein, just attribute, and we retain copyright" - I'm not sure if that's entirely compatible with CC-by-SA, but it would seem to be ok to reuse their TD and Senator images where we're missing them. (Apologies if everyone knew this and was doing it already!) Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 23:47, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

@Bastun: As I understand it, the Oireachtas (Public Sector Information – Open Data) License is based upon Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International but requires the licensor to refer to the Oireachtas license (which in turn refers to CC-BY 4.0), to properly identify the creator (either House of the Oireachtas or whoever is given as creator), and to retain the Houses' or other Licensor's copyright notice (see 3.2 in this document). In summary, there is more to be done than just “attribute” it and it is based upon CC-BY 4.0 not CC-BY-SA (but CC-BY is one-way compatible to CC-BY-SA). In my opinion, all this would be best handled by a special license template which would be quite similar to {{OGL-3.0}} of the UK which is also based on CC-BY 4.0. --AFBorchert (talk) 17:43, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Category:Foreign relations of the Republic of Ireland has been nominated for discussion

Category:Foreign relations of the Republic of Ireland, which is within the scope of this wikiproject, has been nominated for renaming to Category:Foreign relations of Ireland. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you.. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:42, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

This discussion has had input from few editors. Broader input would be welcome at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 December 6#Foreign relations of Ireland. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:16, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

The discussion has now been closed and the category renamed as requested. --AFBorchert (talk) 17:20, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Links to Ryan Commission site

I fixed link to the Ryan Commission used as a reference in St. Conleths Reformatory School to use the Wayback machine. Seems the domain may have expired - is there any organised effort to update the links to this site in this manner or are the updates ad hoc? Autarch (talk) 05:37, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Fixed. The answer to your question is no, there is no organised effort to update links as far as I know. Scolaire (talk) 12:16, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. Autarch (talk) 19:48, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Help needed – someone who can do tables

I'm looking for somebody with the expertise to fix a table at Leader of Sinn Féin#Vice Presidents. The details are at Talk:Leader of Sinn Féin#Vice Presidents. Thanks in advance. Scolaire (talk) 14:22, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Updated per talk. Spleodrach (talk) 19:50, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Category:17th century in Northern Ireland has been nominated for discussion

Category:17th century in Northern Ireland, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for deletion, along with several other similar categories.. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:14, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Great Famine (Ireland), Irish nationalism and discretionary sanctions

At Talk:Great Famine (Ireland)#DS notice there was a request regarding why that article was subject to the discretionary sanctions authorised for The Troubles which has lead to me discovering that it is very unclear whether the scope of that authorisation includes "Irish nationalism" (the aspect that allows it on the Great Famine article) and "British nationalism in relation to Ireland" or not. If you have opinions about whether the Great Famine specifically and/or Irish nationalism in general and/or British nationalism in relation to Ireland (independent from The Troubles) should be subject to discretionary sanctions or not, please comment here or at Talk:Great Famine (Ireland)#DS notice. Please do invite comments from other relevant people/places (but to respond in one of those two places only), but this is just an informal exploration of views from those working in the topic area prior to a formal request for clarification/amendment so it's not vital at this stage that everybody is heard (that opportunity will come at the ARCA). Thryduulf (talk) 01:49, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Related to the above, I've traced what I think is the history of the authorisation: see User:Thryduulf/Troubles scope. Thryduulf (talk) 09:00, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

The narrowest of the various scopes is "The Troubles, broadly interpreted", so I looked at what articles are currently marked as being in scope of the restrictions but which might not be if were chosen. Almost all of these are related to the Easter Rising, so before I ask for clarification from arbcom it would be good to know whether editors think the Easter Rising-related articles would fall within "The Troubles, broadly interpreted"? (talk) 19:08, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes, Thryduulf. Anything on which nationalist/republican and unionist/British editors were edit-warring at the time of the Troubles case comes under the Arbcom remit. That definitely involves anything from the foundation of the Irish Volunteers in 1913, or indeed the foundation of Sinn Féin in 1905, onwards. That would most certainly include the Easter Rising. Earlier events, such as the Famine, were included because some of the aforementioned editors edit-warred on those articles. Scolaire (talk) 19:35, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

@Scolaire: If you take the scope of the sanctions as "related to The Troubles, Irish nationalism, and British nationalism in relation to Ireland" then yes there is no question they are included, however it's not clear that that is the scope and it's not clear (to me) whether the Easter Rising would be within a scope of just "The Troubles" and your reply doesn't make that any clearer either way. Thryduulf (talk) 19:41, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

@Scolaire: fixing the ping. Thryduulf (talk) 19:42, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Then I don't understand your question. If you're asking "did Easter 1916 fall in the period 1968–1998?" then the answer is no. I thought you were asking "was the ArbCom case exclusively about articles covering the period 1968–1998 in Northern Ireland, or was it about disruption and conflict on Wikipedia over a wide range of articles including The Troubles, Irish nationalism, and British nationalism in relation to Ireland?", and that was the question I attempted to answer. If you want to know the whys and wherefores, obviously you'll have to read through the case, including the Evidence page. But if you just want the bottom line, then I suggest you go to the bottom line (the second from bottom, actually): "all articles [that] could be reasonably construed as being related to The Troubles, Irish nationalism, and British nationalism in relation to Ireland, are placed under an 1RR rule under the authority of #Standard discretionary sanctions."

By the way, the ping worked the first time, thanks. Scolaire (talk) 09:57, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

My question is, if the scope of the discretionary sanctions is "The Troubles, broadly interpreted" would articles related to the Easter Rising (e.g. Tom Clarke (Irish republican)) fall within that scope? I ask this because the scope of the discretionary sanctions authorisation is not clear (the scope of the 1RR restriction is clear, and the reasons for it are clear, but the wording of the discretionary sanctions scope varies from place to place). As for the ping, I'm astounded it worked first time as I typoed your username! Thryduulf (talk) 10:47, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

My mistake. It didn't work the first time, it notified me twice the second time (which is also strange). Okay, read The Troubles. The Easter Rising, the founding of the Volunteers, early Sinn Féin and all the other stuff is there in the Background section; therefore it is essential background to the Troubles; therefore it is falls within the scope of the Troubles, if "the Troubles" is broadly interpreted. Will that do as an answer? I still don't understand why you're obsessing with the semantics of the remedies instead of what the case was actually about, but I guess that's your business. Scolaire (talk) 12:27, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

That answers my question. The scopes being different in different places has caused confusion at least once and certainly has the potential to cause more than that, so I want to clarify it to avoid that and prevent any problems with wikilawyers. Thryduulf (talk) 14:00, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

I have now initiated the clarification request: Please review the request at ]]Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Clarification request: The Troubles]] and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the Wikipedia:Arbitration guide may be of use. Thryduulf (talk) 17:20, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Deletion discussion for Nancy O'Rahilly

Hi there is a deletion discussion underway (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nancy O'Rahilly) where not many people have taken part. It might be helpful if members of WikiProject Ireland could express a view on whether or not the subject of the article is notable. Mccapra (talk) 12:12, 15 January 2019 (UTC)