Talk:Máire Rua O'Brien

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Ireland Low‑importance

	Ireland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject IrelandTemplate:WikiProject IrelandIreland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women's History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was created or improved during the "The 20,000 Challenge: UK and Ireland", which started on 20 August 2016 and is still open. You can help!

Soldiers in 1660s

The but about them being in it in the 1660s. Is just to show they were in it

Nothing's wrong with that Clonloumbog123 (talk) 15:55, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. There is. As per my recent note on your user talk page, there absolutely is something wrong with morphing a source which states "soldiers were stationed on and off Lemenagh during the 1660s" to "O' Brien had affairs with soldiers stationed on and off Lemenagh during the 1660s". As per my note, the source states that soldiers were stationed there. It does NOT SUPPORT the claim or suggestion that the subject had affairs with any or all of them. Claiming otherwise is a nonsense. Guliolopez (talk) 16:10, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Portrait of Marie rua

How do I add another portrait of her from dromoland castle Spookywitch1234 (talk) 20:50, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cooper death

Hi. To the contributor (editing from several usernames/IPs) who seems insistent on extrapolating from a limited set of sources (and doing so in a way which relies entirely on OR and synth) that John Cooper predeceased the subject, I would draw your attention to the source you have yourself added. Specifically, the Inchiquin papers collection catalogued and stored by the National Library of Ireland. And, in particular, manuscript number 45.301/2 in that collection. This manuscript is reputedly a letter, dated 17 December 1689, from the same John Cooper. To his son-in-law Richard Wilson. If John Cooper was dead by 1686, then what is he doing writing letters to family in 1689? Dead men may not tell tales, but they certainly don't write letters. It is a matter of verifiable record that John Cooper did not pre-decease the subject. Inventing reasons to claim otherwise is not helpful. Stop adding this stuff. And stop using multiple profiles to do so. Escalation next. Guliolopez (talk) 19:47, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Neylon

there's a belief Maire Killed Neylon as his death is mysterious. I put in about his family's medical history to show that his death was natural. Could you please put it back ? 51.37.185.7 (talk) 11:55, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. RE:

"there's a belief Maire Killed Neylon as his death is mysterious". That section (and the article in general) doesn't state anything about this belief/myth. So there is no reason for there to be a counterpoint.
"I put in about his family's medical history to show that his death was natural". What you are describing is a form of WP:ORIGINALRESEARCH and WP:EDITORIAL. (The age of Neylon or Neylon's father, at the time of his death, is of questionable relevance. Especially when paired with an editorial statement that "the Neylons had a history of dying young". Which is a statement not made in the source. And therefore a form of WP:SYNTH.)
"Could you please put it back". While, perhaps, I understand the attempt to address the (historical and almost certainly false) "stories" that surround the subject (including silliness about witchcraft, ghosts, affairs with dozens of men, killing dozens of "husbands", etc), the way to address this is with fact. Not additional editorial and other empty stories. As it stands, the "stories" have been largely been moved to a "legends" section. Where it is clear that that is what they are. Adding in other "stories" (in the "factual" sections) is not really an improvement. Folklore and history should not be conflated. In either "direction".

My two cents anyway. Guliolopez (talk) 12:07, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]