Talk:Listowel

On 4 June 2021, it was proposed that this article be moved to Listowel, County Kerry. The result of the discussion was not moved.

Published writers with Listowel Connection

There is no reason not to include a list of published writers with a Listowel connection when Listowel is cited at the start of the article as being the "Literary Capital of Ireland". The published works of the authors are cited in this section. Please stop deleting this section. Listowel is famous for its writing and writers and it is relevant to the article.

Hi. Please read WP:LISTCRITERIA. If we have a "list of writers with a connection to X", then the criteria for inclusion has to be clear. And has to be referenced. (Put simply, the connection to Listowel has to be clearly defined. And cited.) Also consider reading WP:BUTITSTRUE. Thanks. Guliolopez (talk) 13:37, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - How do you cite where someone is from? Do you have to include their birth certificate? Respectfully, you're being disingenuous. Many of these people are famous Listowel people. I've read the list criteria and it does not call for citations to be required as to where someone is from or lived. Please stop editing this as it is incorrect.

Hi - You have left in the notable people section (excluding some of the most famous Listowel people. The notable people section doesn't cite anywhere that those people are from Listowel.

Respectfully, other than the citation you've just included for Gerard Barrett, none of the other "notable people" have a reference citing the Listowel connection. As such, you're promoting double standards. Until the Notable People section is brought up to the standard that you are requiring for the published authors section, the published authors' section should remain. Accordingly, I will bring back that section.

Hi.

(1) RE "disingenuous". Please read WP:CIVIL. Or, in more straight forward terms: play the ball - not the man. (Adding the word "respectfully" before a phrase doesn't give licence to then ignore WP:AGF).

(2) RE "notable people". You are correct. This section is also uncited. I have started to attempt to correct that. Please however read WP:OSE. Or, in more straight forward terms: two wrongs don't make a right.

(3) Don't remove or edit other people's talk page contributions.

Thanks. Guliolopez (talk) 13:54, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am being entirely civil. To say using the word disingenuous is not being civil is, well. Disingenuous. I propose a compromise. You can fix the notable people section and I will try to fix the published authors section. While we're both working on it, both sections will remain up. This seems fair. Give me until the 4th of June. I didn't meant to edit your contribution, I thought I was editing my own .

Just as an aside, I think it's better to try and fix something on WP if it needs fixing instead of just deleting it wholesale. This would have taken a lot of time to create and I'm sure the authors were not familiar with the stringent citing requirements.

Hi. RE:

CIVIL - I don't know about the dictionary that you have, but "disingenuous", to me, describes someone who is not acting with honour or sincerity. Describing another editor as being without honour or sincerity doesn't sound civil to me. Even if prefaced with "respectfully". ("With all due respect [insert personal attack here]" is still a personal attack. Prefaced with feigned respect or not). There should be no reason to ascribe an adjective to another editor. At all.
Notable - OK. I will continue as I have been. I will have it done in 20 minutes.
Leave it up - Fine. If everything is as self evident as proposed, then 4 June should be plenty of time.
Fix it/don't delete it - That is possible for small issues. Otherwise the burden lies with the person seeking to add it. The guidelines are quite clear about this.
SIGN - Consider signing your talk page comments.

Guliolopez (talk) 14:38, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Glad we got this sorted. I'll work on it as much as I can over the week. Cheers. Listowel User 16.26, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello. I waited as requested. Longer than requested in fact. No sources have been forthcoming. I have merged the cited content with the relevant section. And removed the uncited and non-notable elements. Thanks. Guliolopez (talk) 15:15, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

What happened to all the edits I made about Listowel being a heritage town, and the expansion of Writer's week, and the Races, and the castle??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.134.187.163 (talk) 03:09, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's rubbish... Citation needed for being one of the best examples of norman architecture in kerry??? IT IS!

Jesus, would you ask for a citation if i said the sky was blue? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.134.211.47 (talk) 18:01, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. If there was even a reference (anything) confirming that the castle is even considered "Anglo-Norman architecture", then that might help. Even if there wasn't one stating that some people (whoever they are) consider it to be the best example. Some kind (any kind) of cite is required however. (Per Wikipedia guidelines). Guliolopez (talk) 18:11, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fine. I cite it. It was built in anglo norman times, it IS anglo norman architecture, I know for a FACT that it is the best example in Kerry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.134.175.126 (talk) 02:21, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Listowel. 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:

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) 04:51, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Listowel. 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:

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) 10:59, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 4 June 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jack Frost (talk) 02:39, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Listowel → Listowel, County Kerry – Pageviews clearly give the edge to Listowel, Ontario. Per WP:NOPRIMARY, Listowel should be a disambiguation page. 162 etc. (talk) 19:15, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per long-term significance. The town in Kerry predates the Ontario town by over 500 years. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 06:53, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:DPT tells us that when determining a primary topic (...) historical age is not determinative. Being the original source of the name is also not determinative. While Listowel, County Kerry may have the longer history of the two, this does not automatically grant it primary status. 162 etc. (talk) 13:37, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:PTOPIC, neither pageviews nor long-term significance are determinative. The nomination cherry-picks the guideline to focus only on pageviews, which is is disingenuous. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:05, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. While subject age (alone) and the subject being the original source of the name (alone) isn't/aren't determinative, neither is page views a determining factor (alone). And that seems to be what we are saying ("page views => move"). In terms of origin, all sources establish that the unincorporated community in Ontario (known as Mapleton until 1856) is named after the town in Ireland. As is every other article which would be added to the proposed DAB page. (Listowel mutiny, Listowel Castle, Listowel Racecourse, etc). Otherwise, the other considerations proposed by WP:DPT would seem to favour the town in Kerry. (Including backlink count:441 > 227; Google count 1,280,000 > 1,050,000; etc). I would have no concern with a DAB page being created (and linked from the hatnote to redirect any potentially misdirected reader). But I don't see how it can be argued that the town in Ireland isn't the primary topic. When every other topic/title is derived from it. Including those in Canada. The backlinks and Google metrics favour the Irish town. And, as far as I can tell, the only metric that favours the Ontario settlement is page views. And, even at that, the difference isn't as dramatic/marked as all that. Guliolopez (talk) 14:02, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per WP:ONEOTHER. While Ontario has about 10 times the views compared to Kerry, people don't seem to have a problem finding the Canadian town. The Irish town has more incoming wikilinks. If it was a problem, everyone would be coming to Listowel and clicking onwards to the Ontario version, bringing the views much much higher than they are. I think the hatnote to Ontario is sufficient. ~ Ablaze (talk) 14:20, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per WP:ONEOTHER and per Ablaze. Spleodrach (talk) 23:49, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Long-term significance very clearly favours the Irish town. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:23, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Obviously, the town in Ontario deserves the name just as much as the one in Ireland. Any other solution is just Bias. Jacona (talk) 15:50, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Adding a section about Tempaillin Bán

Hello, I was just wondering if it would be okay if I added a section about the famine graveyard, Tempaillin Bán? Please let me know. Many thanks,

LyonsH82 (talk) 19:58, 20 October 2021 (UTC).[reply]