Talk:Ballineen and Enniskean

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ballineen and Enniskean. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.corkandross.org/jsp/parishes/parishmainnew.jsp?parish=29
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110721125109/http://kinneighunion.ie/ to http://kinneighunion.ie/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:56, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Enniskean and Enniskeane

As with many Irish placenames, anglicised from the original Irish into English, there are variants of the spelling. In the case of this title/subject, we find variants including Enniskean (no "e") and Enniskeane (with "e").

An editor, who favours the latter, made an undiscussed move of this article. In doing so, overturning 18 years of stability, overriding the name given to the combined census town, ignoring (and misrepresenting) the placenames commission entry and editorialising about which is more common.

I have restored the original title (in line with WP:RMUM) and opened this thread to provide for discussion, and establishment of some form of consensus/compromise on what the article title should be. And how we reflect the varying spellings in the body.

Personally I believe that Ballineen and Enniskean is the most appropriate title for the article. As it reflects the census town name(s) (of Ballineen-Enniskean or Ballineen/Enniskean), reflects the Placenames Commission DB, the local road signage, etc. Absolutely, the spelling variations should be covered, reflected and discussed in the body (and where reflected in the refs, the "Enniskeane" variant used), but the attempts to declare that one has primacy over the other, without refs or discussion, is a concern.

(Note: I have opened a separate thread on the undiscussed move of the Ballineen and Enniskean railway station title. Which the moving editor should reasonably have expected to be potentially controversial. And so should have followed WP:PCM.)

Cheers. Guliolopez (talk) 15:58, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Aquabluetesla. Building on your previous unsupported editorialising claim about "Enniskean" being a "less common" name for the village, you have now added an unsupported/editorial note that states "Enniskeane" is the "original name of the town". What basis are you relying upon for this please? There are several centuries-old sources (including James Fraser's A Hand Book for Travellers in Ireland (1849), Commissioners of Inquiry into Collection and Management of Revenue in Ireland and Great Britain (1822), Census of Population of Ireland, 1831; Comparative Abstract, 1821 and 1831 (1831), a Dublin Penn Journal article titled Rides through the County of Cork (1834)), all of which give the "Enniskean" spelling.

You also state in that editorial/note that "since the 1991 census, the town has been listed as 'Enniskean' by the Central Statistics Office". Implying that, before 1991, it was known by some other census name. Which isn't the case. And certainly isn't the case that "Enniskeane" (with an "e") was used. (In the 1981 census and 1986 census, for example, "Ballineen/Enniskean", was used. Before the census town was combined, in the 1961 census for example the populations are given separately for "Ballineen" and "Enniskean (Enniskeen)". Prior to that, in the 1901 census, for example, the village was given as "Enniskeen" and in the 1911 census as "Enniskeen Town". Neither of which align with this implication or the "Enniskeane was the original name" claims).

What are you basing these "original name" and "since 1991" notes/editorial upon? Guliolopez (talk) 18:44, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Aquabluetesla: Please address the concerns above. And also those raised in the related tags. In short, your editorial note that the:

"Original name was Enniskeane" is not supported by the provided reference. The Roman Catholic parish register does not state as much. And reading/asserting that it does is WP:OR and WP:SYNTH.
"[Enniskean is on] a road sign in the town" is misleading. At best. All the council road signs give Enniskean. Not just the one I linked above. All of them do.
"It was also named Enniskeen until after the 1956 census" is not supported by a related reference (that 1906 railway map has nothing to do with the 1956 census). If your note in this regard is based on the research/links I provided above, then it is OR/SYNTH.

Please provide verifiable references for, in particular, your claim that "Enniskeane" is the "original" name of the village. Thanks. Guliolopez (talk) 19:25, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

While it seems that I am still talking to myself, the "long, rambling and unsupported commentary in a margin/footer note" is not the place to cover the variant spellings of the anglicised version of Enniskean/Enniskeane/Enniskeen. This situation is very common and (as we see in Lahinch (Lehinch), Cappoquin (Cappaquin), Ennistymon (Ennistimon), Clonaslee (Cloneslieu), Baltinglass (Baltinglas), Dún Laoghaire (Dún Laoire), etc), the convention is to have a "name" section which discusses the etymology and variations. I will add such a section shortly. In adding this section I will also, quite frankly, remove (as uncited OR and SYNTH) the claim that one variation has a claim to originality and primacy. As, not only is it completely unsupported, it doesn't hold any water. I also propose to remove/reduce most of what is in the editorial note. As rambling OR. And propose to move some of the variations from the lead to the new "name" section. Not least as MOS:BOLD isn't being followed. I also propose, FYI, to ensure that the body and text reflects the relevant spellings. For example, where the "sawmill" sources use Enniskeane, we will use that spelling. However, where the "Kean/Cian" sources use Enniskean, we should reflect that spelling. Otherwise we have WP:TSI issues. Other thoughts and engagement is (as always) welcome/encouraged/expected. Guliolopez (talk) 11:11, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK Aquabluetesla. I've deliberately left this several days. To give time (as you repeatedly said you would) to address the points raised here and in the related tags. While have seemingly been active in other areas, the FV/CN concerns (in particular) with the editorial note have not been addressed. And so, as above, I am going to go ahead and "move" the stuff on the varying names (from this note to a Wikipedia:CITSTRUCT#Toponymy section), remove some of the uncited stuff (in the note about one spelling variant having primacy), and ensure that (in each case in the body) we are using the variant we see in the source. In a way, hopefully, that doesn't lead to too much confusion or inconsistency for the reader. Even though I could well still be "talking to myself", I will update this thread once done. For feedback. Guliolopez (talk) 10:11, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK. As above I have now made the relevant changes. Including moving the "name variations/derivations" content from a margin/footer note to a Toponymy section. And updating that section to remove the "one of these names is the original" stuff that isn't supported, and updating it with sourced text. I've been at pains to make the changes piecemeal and to explain every last little change (with references to the sources, this Talk page and the related Wikipedia policies), but if anything is unclear or whatever, happy to discuss here. Guliolopez (talk) 11:38, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Aquabluetesla, please don't go against the sources and the guidelines to give your preferred spelling priority. As I explained, when it comes to places it's standard to have the article name first, followed by any alternative names. Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names) says: "The title can be followed in the first line by a list of alternative names in parentheses", "Infoboxes should generally be headed with the article title", and "The same name as in the title should be used consistently throughout the article". When it says "the title can be followed by alternative names" it means that listing those alternative names in the lead is optional, if there are any. It doesn't mean you can put the names in any order you like. Pinging Guliolopez too. – Asarlaí ^(talk) 08:59, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Guliolopez, we may have had our disagreements, but your additions to the article have been very good and constructive, especially your addition of the etymology section. I feel the state of the article was fairly good. Asarlaí, everytime the town's name is written, it generally has a source. No, that is not the case of the standard for this article. As per MOS:LEAD; “The name or names given in the first sentence does not always match the article title.” The longer name is generally given first. If "Enniskeane" is placed in the parentheses it is a "misrepresentation" of the source that gives the translation of the Irish name as "Enniskean". "Enniskeane" is just as commonly referenced, if not more, by the sources in the article as the other name. It was also the only emboldened name in the lead and the only in the infobox of the article, before it was changed a month ago by Guliolopez, since December 2016.Aquabluetesla (talk) 08:29, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for (both) pings. RE:

"we may have had our disagreements". Indeed. Including on misrepresentation of sources, warring and lack of engagement. Intrigued that this is your first/ever contribution to any related article Talk page. But glad of it.
"additions to the article have been very good and constructive". Thanks.
"[Enniskeane was] the only emboldened name in the lead [..] before it was changed a month ago by Guliolopez". Indeed. I changed it. Because, despite an update to suggest that the source said something else, the only linked source didn't support that text. I do not see how that specific change of mine can be considered anything other than constructive/appropriate.
"If 'Enniskeane' is placed in the parentheses it is a misrepresentation of the source that gives the translation of the Irish name as 'Enniskean'". I don't understand what you're trying to say here. I really don't. However, while I don't have a strong opinion (either way) about the use of parentheses, I do believe that "Enniskean" (as the "official" name used by the CSO, Placenames Commission, roadsigns, etc) is best listed first. Personally I thought the lead construct we had a few weeks ago was a reasonable compromise/flow.

My 2x cents at any rate. Guliolopez (talk) 09:56, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]