Boyle Roche has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that an image or photograph be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Speaking of "The Letters of Junius", Roche referred to "an anonymous author called Junius." I agree that "The Letters of Junius" had an anonymous author. But the author was not called Junius. To speak of an anonymous author who is called anything is nonsense. This is why the quote is amusing (but only to some, apparently). I would like to restore the quote, but I don't want to get into a revision war. Opinions, please? ubiquity 23:14, 17 June 2006 (UTC)ubiquity
To me, psuedonymous and anonymous are not the same thing, and I find humor in Roche's confusion. But I also see your point, and it does begin to seem like a minor quibble, and the other quotes are funnier anyway. ubiquity 04:10, 18 June 2006 (UTC)ubiquity
Was this coincidence, or a subtle joke on Roche's part? The name "Valentine" was the traditional name for the first-born son in Lord Kenmare's family. Lord Kenmare himself was one of the few Viscounts Kenmare who were not named Valentine, as the name had been given to his older brother (who died before he had a chance to inherit the title). ubiquity 21:25, 21 June 2006 (UTC)ubiquity
I wonder if it is possible to get a portrait of Boyle Roche. All I can find is this. Maybe there is something at the Kerry Museum. Grouse 09:44, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
I did a full text search of the Irish Times using Lexis-Nexis for [Boyle Roche] and found 13 articles. One was the cited biography. Another was a review of Jonah Barrington's memoirs, ISBN 190165804X. Another a review of Dublin's Yesterdays which might mention him as well. Grouse 09:20, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
These are messed up now, but don't seem to like being cited in the infobox. Don't have time to fix right now. Also, they aren't *all* from the Johnston-Liik book, are they? Grouse 09:44, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm working on reviewing this as a Good Article, and while I'm not done, I've run across some issues.
Resolution of these problems would be welcome. Choess 03:49, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
Point 1: the prose is compelling, and indeed well styled. The structure is logical, and largely chronological, separating out his married life (of which there is relatively little to be said), and his quotation on birds, which has become a figure of speech. It appears to follow the manual of style in relevant particulars. No jargon is employed.
Point 2: the article is extensively referenced, and the sources appear to be reliable. Original research is not evident.
Point 3: the article covers all aspects of Roche's life. The sections on militaria and family life are short, but data on these is probably scant in general. It is well-balanced, considering that the subject's present-day reputation is largely based on a propensity for malapropisms.
Point 4: the article is NPOV. The principle POV issue, whether or not Roche's malapropisms were entirely unintentional id discussed evenhandedly.
Point 5: while extensively upgraded recently to improve its quality, the article does not appear to have been subject to edit wars, and is not expected to change greatly now that improvements are complete.
Point 6: the article does not contain an image of the subject. As the online ODNB and online database of the National Portrait Gallery contain no images of the subject, this is deemed acceptable.
I therefore certify "Boyle Roche" as a Good Article. Choess 01:33, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
While trolling Google Books to discover his relationship or (as it appears) lack thereof with "Tiger" Roche, I found "The House of Cromwell and the Story of Dunkirk: with anecdotes and letters", James Waylen, 1880. His wife Mary was a descendant of Oliver Cromwell, and so he comes within the purview of the book. It quite definitely identifies the Lt. Boyle Roche, captured with Pringle, as being the baronet. Choess 06:26, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
I added a "peacock term" tag to the final line of the article. The specific words I am concerned about are "witty", "quickness", and "excellent." This is a good example of where the facts should speak for themselves without interpretation from Wikipedia editors. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 05:45, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells ( talk) 14:55, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
#:: The Lead does not adequately summarise the article, please read
WP:LEAD.
#::I thought a crisis was arrived in which Lord Kenmare and the heads of that body should step forth to disavow those wilde projects, and to profess their attachment to the lawful powers. Unfortunately, his lordship was at a great distance, and most of my other friends were out of the way. I therefore resolved on a bold stroke, and authorized only by the sentiments of the persons in question, [took action]. - quotations need a direct cite.
It is well known now, however, and was when he made them, that they were studied bulls, resorted to principally for the purpose of putting the government and opposition sides of the Irish House of Commons into good humor with each other, which they never failed to do—thereby, on more occasions than one, probably, preventing the effusion of blood, and the loss of life, among men who frequently decided even their political differences by the sword or pistol. [1] Kittybrewster ☎ 17:42, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Boyle Roche/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
I have listed this as GA-class, having just approved it as a Good Article. The article covers all phases of his career, and delves into his politics as well as his common portrayal as a buffoon. The references are excellent, and it is appropriately styled. Choess 03:03, 17 September 2006 (UTC) |
Last edited at 03:03, 17 September 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 10:08, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Boyle Roche. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:01, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
Boyle Roche has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that an image or photograph be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Speaking of "The Letters of Junius", Roche referred to "an anonymous author called Junius." I agree that "The Letters of Junius" had an anonymous author. But the author was not called Junius. To speak of an anonymous author who is called anything is nonsense. This is why the quote is amusing (but only to some, apparently). I would like to restore the quote, but I don't want to get into a revision war. Opinions, please? ubiquity 23:14, 17 June 2006 (UTC)ubiquity
To me, psuedonymous and anonymous are not the same thing, and I find humor in Roche's confusion. But I also see your point, and it does begin to seem like a minor quibble, and the other quotes are funnier anyway. ubiquity 04:10, 18 June 2006 (UTC)ubiquity
Was this coincidence, or a subtle joke on Roche's part? The name "Valentine" was the traditional name for the first-born son in Lord Kenmare's family. Lord Kenmare himself was one of the few Viscounts Kenmare who were not named Valentine, as the name had been given to his older brother (who died before he had a chance to inherit the title). ubiquity 21:25, 21 June 2006 (UTC)ubiquity
I wonder if it is possible to get a portrait of Boyle Roche. All I can find is this. Maybe there is something at the Kerry Museum. Grouse 09:44, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
I did a full text search of the Irish Times using Lexis-Nexis for [Boyle Roche] and found 13 articles. One was the cited biography. Another was a review of Jonah Barrington's memoirs, ISBN 190165804X. Another a review of Dublin's Yesterdays which might mention him as well. Grouse 09:20, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
These are messed up now, but don't seem to like being cited in the infobox. Don't have time to fix right now. Also, they aren't *all* from the Johnston-Liik book, are they? Grouse 09:44, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm working on reviewing this as a Good Article, and while I'm not done, I've run across some issues.
Resolution of these problems would be welcome. Choess 03:49, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
Point 1: the prose is compelling, and indeed well styled. The structure is logical, and largely chronological, separating out his married life (of which there is relatively little to be said), and his quotation on birds, which has become a figure of speech. It appears to follow the manual of style in relevant particulars. No jargon is employed.
Point 2: the article is extensively referenced, and the sources appear to be reliable. Original research is not evident.
Point 3: the article covers all aspects of Roche's life. The sections on militaria and family life are short, but data on these is probably scant in general. It is well-balanced, considering that the subject's present-day reputation is largely based on a propensity for malapropisms.
Point 4: the article is NPOV. The principle POV issue, whether or not Roche's malapropisms were entirely unintentional id discussed evenhandedly.
Point 5: while extensively upgraded recently to improve its quality, the article does not appear to have been subject to edit wars, and is not expected to change greatly now that improvements are complete.
Point 6: the article does not contain an image of the subject. As the online ODNB and online database of the National Portrait Gallery contain no images of the subject, this is deemed acceptable.
I therefore certify "Boyle Roche" as a Good Article. Choess 01:33, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
While trolling Google Books to discover his relationship or (as it appears) lack thereof with "Tiger" Roche, I found "The House of Cromwell and the Story of Dunkirk: with anecdotes and letters", James Waylen, 1880. His wife Mary was a descendant of Oliver Cromwell, and so he comes within the purview of the book. It quite definitely identifies the Lt. Boyle Roche, captured with Pringle, as being the baronet. Choess 06:26, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
I added a "peacock term" tag to the final line of the article. The specific words I am concerned about are "witty", "quickness", and "excellent." This is a good example of where the facts should speak for themselves without interpretation from Wikipedia editors. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 05:45, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells ( talk) 14:55, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
#:: The Lead does not adequately summarise the article, please read
WP:LEAD.
#::I thought a crisis was arrived in which Lord Kenmare and the heads of that body should step forth to disavow those wilde projects, and to profess their attachment to the lawful powers. Unfortunately, his lordship was at a great distance, and most of my other friends were out of the way. I therefore resolved on a bold stroke, and authorized only by the sentiments of the persons in question, [took action]. - quotations need a direct cite.
It is well known now, however, and was when he made them, that they were studied bulls, resorted to principally for the purpose of putting the government and opposition sides of the Irish House of Commons into good humor with each other, which they never failed to do—thereby, on more occasions than one, probably, preventing the effusion of blood, and the loss of life, among men who frequently decided even their political differences by the sword or pistol. [1] Kittybrewster ☎ 17:42, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Boyle Roche/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
I have listed this as GA-class, having just approved it as a Good Article. The article covers all phases of his career, and delves into his politics as well as his common portrayal as a buffoon. The references are excellent, and it is appropriately styled. Choess 03:03, 17 September 2006 (UTC) |
Last edited at 03:03, 17 September 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 10:08, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Boyle Roche. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:01, 6 November 2016 (UTC)