This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Plantations of Ireland article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
What is going on here? I don't understand this edit, which seems to be changing a grammar error into a different grammar error. At any rate, it seems stupid for everyone to revert each other with no discussion. Please, @ Mutt Lunker:, @ 109.77.81.149:, @ Denisarona:, @ The Banner: have a chat, will you? jp× g 10:47, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
I'm not a sock puppet. Also if idiot banner had decided to give a legitimate reason for reversion I would have validated his wishes like I did with JPxG, yet he refused to give any and violated the rules of Wikipedia again and again. He started the edit war not me. I told him to go to the talk page and give his issues with it. He did nothing but revert my edits without reason.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.77.81.149 ( talk • contribs)
Administrator note: IP, your comment above is subpar. Calling your content opponent an "idiot" is subpar (obviously). If you continue conducting yourself in a manner that's incompatible with a collaborative project, that's just going to void your position by extension (as a product of a page or project-wide suspension). Also, please consistently WP:SIGN and WP:INDENT your comments. We need to know who said what to whom at any given time. In short, be professional by reviewing the pertinent documentation and acting accordingly. Thanks. El_C 12:30, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
Anyone know the state of current scholarship on this topic? In the British Empire article there's a relatively brief mention of the Ulster plantation in the first section, which has been described as a "colonization" project. I objected to this framing on the grounds that it's controversial and unnuanced, but editors don't really want to contend with this issue. I know that Modern Irish scholarship is much clearer on the point that it's inaccurate to describe Ireland's status inside the UK (1801 -1921) as "colonial". What about Early Modern scholarship? Jonathan f1 ( talk) 00:20, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
This article should mention that the immigrants were joining Scots already present in Ulster from centuries of smaller-scale immigration of gallowglass mercenaries and their families from Scotland. The Plantation of Ulster article mentions them, but not this one, so it is presenting an inconsistent historical view to our readers. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 08:06, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Plantations of Ireland article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
What is going on here? I don't understand this edit, which seems to be changing a grammar error into a different grammar error. At any rate, it seems stupid for everyone to revert each other with no discussion. Please, @ Mutt Lunker:, @ 109.77.81.149:, @ Denisarona:, @ The Banner: have a chat, will you? jp× g 10:47, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
I'm not a sock puppet. Also if idiot banner had decided to give a legitimate reason for reversion I would have validated his wishes like I did with JPxG, yet he refused to give any and violated the rules of Wikipedia again and again. He started the edit war not me. I told him to go to the talk page and give his issues with it. He did nothing but revert my edits without reason.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.77.81.149 ( talk • contribs)
Administrator note: IP, your comment above is subpar. Calling your content opponent an "idiot" is subpar (obviously). If you continue conducting yourself in a manner that's incompatible with a collaborative project, that's just going to void your position by extension (as a product of a page or project-wide suspension). Also, please consistently WP:SIGN and WP:INDENT your comments. We need to know who said what to whom at any given time. In short, be professional by reviewing the pertinent documentation and acting accordingly. Thanks. El_C 12:30, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
Anyone know the state of current scholarship on this topic? In the British Empire article there's a relatively brief mention of the Ulster plantation in the first section, which has been described as a "colonization" project. I objected to this framing on the grounds that it's controversial and unnuanced, but editors don't really want to contend with this issue. I know that Modern Irish scholarship is much clearer on the point that it's inaccurate to describe Ireland's status inside the UK (1801 -1921) as "colonial". What about Early Modern scholarship? Jonathan f1 ( talk) 00:20, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
This article should mention that the immigrants were joining Scots already present in Ulster from centuries of smaller-scale immigration of gallowglass mercenaries and their families from Scotland. The Plantation of Ulster article mentions them, but not this one, so it is presenting an inconsistent historical view to our readers. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 08:06, 20 July 2023 (UTC)