This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Please could someone take a look at this article. First I wanted to add a template for speedy deletion because of WP:nonsense but perhaps this really is a man, famous in the region of Cork.-- Thw1309 09:40, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

I just nominated George Moore (novelist) at FAR because it lacks inline citations. To comment or help improve the article, please see Wikipedia:Featured article review/George Moore (novelist). Calliopejen1 17:23, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

This was saved from demotion, but barely. Still needs more inline citations and some additions to make it more comprehensive. ww2censor ( talk) 21:48, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

New article your project may want to tag and assess: Enda Walsh. Also untagged: Disco Pigs, Elaine Cassidy, Gavin Friday, Jim Sheridan and Aidan Gillen.

BTW, perhaps I'm film-centric, but is Cillian Murphy, one of the most famous Irish film actors, really of only low importance to your project? Best, Melty girl 23:31, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Cillian Murphy has been upgraded since becoming GA, and it was just rated A by WikiProject Biography. I don't know how your assessment process works, but you may want to reassess the article. Thanks, Melty girl 20:15, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

While the WikiProject Biography may regard this as an A class article, in terms of the WikiProject Ireland actors will likely not rate as high as say some Irish statesmen or well known Irish literary figures. Remember that Cillian Murphy may not be very important in the broader view of Irish articles, but you can always ask for an assessment by the assessment team and we will be happy to review it. ww2censor 20:36, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

This comment (unlike my previous comment re Murphy) was about rating the quality of the article, not assessing its importance. You can have an A-class article about a subject of low or high importance. -- Melty girl 21:00, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Mind you, in popular culture, U2 are rated "top" in Irelandproj - so "low" seems a bit tame for internationally known actors. Remember, being known internationally is one of the criteria for "importance". (Guidance can still be clutter - :)!( Sarah777 21:13, 18 September 2007 (UTC))

I think this is a good point. "Mid" is probably a more appropriate rating for Murphy's importance. And GA versus A is a separate qualitative issue. (Heh heh -- I actually agree with you about part of that box being unnecessary. But I've seen so many newbies think that the talk page is a place to discuss the subject rather than the article, that I like to keep it there.) -- Melty girl 21:22, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Probably 'cos of the nature of the subject in this case! I've upped the importance to "mid" (can't guarntee there will be no objections mind)......but the issue of why BioProj and IrlProj should differ on the quality rating is a point. An A should be an A regardless of the importance or the Project I'd reckon.( Sarah777 21:38, 18 September 2007 (UTC))

Be advised that the article Bang Bang (Dublin) is now being disussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bang Bang (Dublin). He may be part urban myth, but I seem to remember an old man who used to randomly walk around central Dublin who would abruptly roar "Bang!", maybe in the early 1970's.

The result was Keep. ww2censor 14:54, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Whilst I am here, I may as well ask if anyone knows anymore verses to this rhyme (which is best recited in a broad Dublin accent):

Johnston Mooney & O' Brien bought a horse for one an' nine,

When the horse began to kick, Johnston Mooney bought a stick,

When the stick began to break, Johnston Mooney bought a rake,

When the rake began to rust, Johnston Mooney bought a bus,

When the bus began to stop, Johnston Mooney bought a shop.

I am not sure what encyclopedic value this is, but let me know if you can remember anything anyways. -- Gavin Collins 12:44, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

variant reading of this ancient piece of doggerel:

...when the rake began to hop, Johnston Mooney bought a shop When the shop began to sell, Johnston Mooney went to hell. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.31.43.107 ( talk) 20:01, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I have proposed renaming all the existing by-county categories to the format "stuff in County X". Many are currently just called "stuff in X", so e.g. Category:Geography of Leitrim would be renamed to Category:Geography of County Leitrim.

I have listed several million of these categories at CfD:

• CfD Oct 7: Category:Towns in the Republic of Ireland
• CfD Oct 7: Yet more Irish categories by county
• CfD Oct 7: Yet more Irish categories by county
• CfD Oct6: Category:Islands of the Republic of Ireland
• CfD Oct6: Category:Townlands of the Republic of Ireland
• CfD Oct6: More Irish county categories
• CfD Oct6: Category:Religion in the Republic of Ireland by locality
• CfD Oct6: Category:Transport in the Republic of Ireland by locality
• CfD Oct6: Category:Buildings and structures in the Republic of Ireland by locality
• CfD Oct6: Category:Geography of the Republic of Ireland by locality
• CfD Oct6: Category:Sport in the Republic of Ireland by locality
• CfD Oct6: Category:Tourism in the_Republic of Ireland by locality

Comments welcome. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 17:47, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Some by-county categories now moved

Just a quick note to say that the first those of Irish by-county categories have now been reamed by the bots, i.e. those nominated at CfD on October 6.

There are more to be done, i.e. those nominated at CfD on October 7. I expect that they will probably be renamed tomorrow. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 17:13, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

As indeed they have been. The only by-county categories currently still in the CfD process are two singe-category nominations:

• October 9# Transport in Fermanagh
• October 9#Sport in Ireland by locality
• October 9# GAA clubs

plus the tidyup group nomination below. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 09:27, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

The last batch

The final batch of by-county categories have now been nominated for renaming: see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 October 14#Even_more_Irish_by-county_categories. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 17:15, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

There seems to be good coverage of roads in the Republic of Ireland: the National Primary Routes have a series of articles which mostly seem to be up to be B-class standard or better, and there is a more mixed collection of articles on regional roads.

They are currently all categorised under Category:Roads in the Republic of Ireland as Category:National Primary Route, Category:Regional Road or Category:Secondary roads in the Republic of Ireland. However, there is no consistent scheme of categorisation by county. Some articles are categorised under "Transport in County X", bit others have no geographical categorisation.

I propose to create a new category Category:Roads in the Republic of Ireland by county, with a subcat for each county Category:Roads in County Carlow etc, and categorise all the road articles accordingly (e.g. N15 road would go in Category:Roads in County Donegal, Category:Roads in County Leitrim and Category:Roads in County Sligo. Any thoughts?

There appear to be fewer road articles in Category:Roads in Northern Ireland, so I'm not sure if this would be quite so useful in the North, but it could be done there too. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 17:47, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

User:Ardfern has set up such a system and I have been populating the categories; but he uses Category:Transport in Longford rather than specifically "roads". (And, of course he uses "Transport in Longford" rather than the proposed "Transport in County Longford".

I presume that Category:Roads in County Longford would be a subcategory of Category:Transport in County Longford? I have no objections to the idea; in Dublin there are already many articles about specific streets so this category could grow pretty large. ( Sarah777 18:31, 8 October 2007 (UTC))

Why categorise the roads by county when most of them pass through more than one county and those counties are well linked in the articles themselves (well the well written infoboxes do have them)? Categorising them by type, just as they are now, seem like the best solution. Otherwise where will you go looking for a road like the N8 road that passes through 5 counties or the N4 road that passes through 8 counties - why have 8 categories on that page when one will do? ww2censor 18:39, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, Ardfern's categorisation is doing that already. So far my record is the N80 (5 counties) but I haven't got to the national primaries yet! I think BHG's suggestion is that we separate 'roads' from 'transport'. Then, if for some strange reason you want to look up all the roads in Dublin - there they are, Motorways, Primaries, secondary, regional, local and streets. ( Sarah777 18:45, 8 October 2007 (UTC))

The transport by county categories are good, and I intend the Roads-by-county categories to be subcats of those (any roads already in the transport categ can be recatted). I think that most counties have more than enough roads to justify a separate sub-category.

I think that Sarah has mostly answered ww2censor's point, but I would just add that ww2censor is looking at it from the perspective of the reader of a road article asking "which counties is this in"? I agree that categories are not a good way of doing that (I'd actually say they are a bad way of doing that) ... but the purpose of the categories is to allow someone looking at the county to answer the question "what articles do we have on roads in this county". In other words, it's for navigating in a different direction. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 19:19, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

PS I should have added that I am proposing this in addition to the categories by type of road, not as a replacement for it. (Re-reading ww2c's comment, it occurred to me that maybe my suggestion might have been read as implying the deletion of those roads-by-type categories). -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 19:23, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

BHG, I understand fully what you propose (and realise that "Roads in County X" would be a sub-cat of "Roads in RoI"; not of "Transport in County X". I think the idea is fine but don't feel very strongly about either way. I think we should get User:Ardfern in on the discussion - he is out there categorising like a Tasmanian Devil.( Sarah777 19:47, 8 October 2007 (UTC))

I agree, and had already let a note at User talk:Ardfern#Roads_by_county. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 19:56, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

(de-indent) I think some of you don't quite see the issue in the same way as I do. I understand that BHG intends these to be additional, renamed cats and not replacements. I cannot agree with more cats for these roads. The problem is that National Primary Route, Roads in the Republic of Ireland and Transport in the Republic of Ireland by locality with its county sub-categories, are already all sub-categories of Transport in the Republic of Ireland. WP guidelines discouraged editors from categorising articles in two sub-categories of the same category, or even a main cat and its sub-cat, as would be the case here. This would seem to be where Ardfern's categorising will lead us if we follow this track. Check out some general categorising guidelines #3 which says "Usually, articles should not be in both a category and its subcategory" but it goes on to give examples of exceptions but they do not cover our scenario. Having read the categorisation guideline, I would therefore suggest all the individual county transport categories should go up for deletion (whether renamed or not) and if no one else will do so I will do so, because it is basically providing different ways of categorising the same articles and making matters more complex, especially where one editors goes in one direction, like Ardfern and another editor chooses a different way of categorising the same type of articles. ww2censor 02:50, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi ww2c, I think you have misread the guidelines. Yes, you are quite right that no article should be in both a category and its sub-category, but that is not what is bring proposed here ... and there is no guideline against having an article in two sub-categories. In fact, that's a the usual way of dealing with intersections between different sorts of categories. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 09:11, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

As on example of this, see Hanna Sheehy-Skeffington. She is in Category:Irish feminists, Category:Irish politicians and Category:People from County Cork, all of which are subcats of Category:Irish people. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 09:15, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I was happy enough with Ardferns cats but he does appear a bit reluctant to come here and argue his case. ( Sarah777 08:23, 9 October 2007 (UTC))

I don't think that there is any contradiction between what I have been doing and the good work done by User:Ardfern. The renamings to include the word "county" were all discussed on Ardfern's talk page, and all I am doing with the roads is building on Ardfern's good work by add a further set of sub-cats; none of Ardfern's work is being undone. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 10:04, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

That AWB thingy you are using is powerful! ( Sarah777 04:19, 10 October 2007 (UTC))

Yes, AWB is a brilliant tool, tho it does need to be used with care, particularly in getting consensus for large numbers of changes (such as creating and populating the roads-by-county categories discussued here). Some tasks require the use of regular expressions, which not everyone understands, but there's a lot that can be done without them, particularly wrt categorisation.

Once the CfRs close and the categories are renamed, I plan to run through them all adding category text and a link to the Ireland portal. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 09:51, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Ww; I think we need some guidelines about replacing or downgrading someone else's photo and replacing it with your own. See St. Mary's Cathedral, Limerick and talk. A fine pic existed for over 2 years and then a poorer version barged in and took over! As you said of my wonderful contribution to your postage article (where you mistakenly though I was annoyed at your removal of it) - in future don't ask; just delete. The problem here (and I'm being 'stalked myself by another 'crappy snapper') is when OK images are being replaced by someone's blurred snatches through the car window. Can we produce a guide or should we just maintain huge watchlists and battle away? ( Sarah777 08:23, 9 October 2007 (UTC))

Some guidelines already exist here and perhaps the most relevant part is that poor quality images should not be used and must be relevant to the article they appear in AND be of sufficient notability. So if they don't comply you are quite at liberty to reinstate the better. more relevant older images and tell refer the editor to the guidelines. Just don't get into an edit war if you can help it and if necessary refer the matter to an admin. Large watchlists? Maybe you already take the record in that field of endeavour! ww2censor 13:32, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

It is my watchlist that gets me into so many scrapes and bumps! Still, it does help keep things uniform across the bits of the project I'm involved in. Happy to know that this exists - I'll be slapping it down around the place in future! ( Sarah777 04:13, 10 October 2007 (UTC))

Staying up late or getting up early? I had a look at St. Mary's Cathedral, Limerick and agree with you about the images but besides that most of the test is a copyvio and needs to be removed leaving rather too little text for more than one relevant image. Even the Celtic cross sunset add nothing to the article. I would even get rid of that too. Lacase will just have to justify any additions he makes after I strip the article; maybe later today as I have other stuff on right now. ww2censor 04:20, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Early bird natch - catching worms!(The vandals come out at night) ( Sarah777 04:45, 10 October 2007 (UTC))

Hello there,

A straw poll has opened at this section of the United Kingdom talk page regarding the use of the Ulster Banner for that article's circumstances only. To capture a representative result as possible, you are invited to pass your opinion there. If joining the poll, please keep a cool head, and remain civil. Hope to see you there, Jza84 22:42, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

This is put forward as a category for deletion, here. To capture a representative result as possible, you are invited to pass your opinion there. If joining, please keep a cool head, and remain civil. Hope to see you there, ( Sarah777 21:30, 12 October 2007 (UTC))

I have proposed a new name for the category, which would resolve many of the problems identified. I'd be grateful for any comments on the proposal. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 16:45, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Can any one confirm if Jason's snooker hall in Ranelagh, Dublin is closed? -- Gavin Collins 12:30, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm suggesting a split of articles and categories on Irish kings. See Talk:List of High Kings of Ireland. Cheers, Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:25, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Irish poetry has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Ceoil 08:04, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi folks, I know that some editors have been working hard for a long time tagging article talk pages with {{ WikiProject Ireland}}, to facilitate monitoring and assessment of articles.

I have recently taken to doing this myself, and have {{ WikiProject Ireland category}} for use in tagging categories; it's more compact and avoids lumping categories into the project's importance categories.

I have also been discussing some automated tagging of categories and articles (see WP:BOTREQ#Tagging_for_WikiProject_Ireland), and I think that we are now close to having a bot tag all the sub-categories of Category:Ireland.

The bot can also tag the articles, but since bots aren't very adept at reading and assessing articles and, it would have to leave all the parameters blank. This may sound rather useless, but what it will do is to populate the unassessed categories, so at least we know what needs to be assessed. This see,ms to be be a very useful step.

However, while I have asked the bot-owner to ahead and tag the categories, I have asked hi to hold off so far on tagging the articles, because there are two issues which I have not yet clarified, and where I want to see if there is a consensus here.

1. I think that the bot could use Category:Ireland stubs and its subcategories to tag all untagged Irish stubs as stub-class. The only concern I see is that the existing stub tags may not be fully accurate, but it seems to me that they will be right more often than not, and that it could save us a lot of work to have the stubs tagged as such (rather than having to fill in the paramaters manually). Is that OK with other editors?
2. So far as I can see, a very high proportion of the articles under Category:Ireland are biographies, and I thought we should consider whether it's a good idea to lump all the biographies in with the other articles. My suggestion is that the thing to do is to create (at least on paper) a nominal biographical workgroup for this project, and ensure that the bot tags the biographical articles accordingly. Even if we don't yet have a dedicated team of Irish biographical editors, I think that tagging the articles in this way would be very helpful to anyone who does want to ficus on biogs, and would also help avoid overwhelming the general project categories. Is that OK with everyone? -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 14:44, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Certainly sounds good to me...after two months of tagging to move from 1,000 articles collected to 4,800 the news that we have 20,000 remaining is a bit daunting - it is fairly gruelling work and it is difficult to keep at it, especially ploughing through the biographies or lists of mythical kings or whatever. Go for it...we can tidy up afterwards in our own areas of interest. ( Sarah777 19:33, 28 October 2007 (UTC))

Tagging the other 20,000 article by a bot seems like a great idea and will leave the job of making assessments without having to search for them within a category. It will certainly save us some work, even if it does not seem like a lot. ww2censor 04:09, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Irish Biographies

I'm sorry but I'm confused - are Irish biographies being wikiproject tagged? -- Nengscoz41620 05:56, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

We do not yet seem to have agreement to auto-tag them, so I will not do so yet. I have some thoughts on how to handle the overlap with WikiProject Biography, and I think that we should explore the options here and discuss them with WP:BIOGRAPHY before any auto-tagging. Will post more later.-- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 09:30, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I have been thinking about the tagging of the biographical articles. Of the 25,000 or so Irish articles, I did a count today and found 16,950 articles under Category:Irish people and its subcats. 113 of those are lists, and some are bands or other music articles, but the vast majority of the rest are biographies of an individual.

However, there are a few problems with building the list in this way, including:

1. Category:Irish people includes over 5,000 articles in Category:People of Irish descent, which I suspect should probably not be tagged as part of WP:IE. (I suggest that we should tag emigrants, but not the whole of the diaspora)
2. It includes Category:Irish Genealogy (tagged for renaming as Category:Irish genealogy), which includes several hundred or articles which are not strictly biographical, such as those in Category:Archives in Ireland)
3. It also includes things which appear under eponymous categories by people, such as Category:Works by James Joyce and various other works-type categories (e.g. Category:The Corrs includes songs and albums as well as band members)
4. I have also removed a few categories which had inappropriately ended up in the Irish people hierachy, such as Category:Irish Republican Army.

So I don't think that a list of biographical articles can be created simply by recursing down through Category:Irish people and its subcats ... but it seems reasonable to estimate that if we exclude the 5,000 articles in the diaspora, there are about 10,000 Irish biographical articles out a total of about 20,000.

It seems to me that a group this large this would make a good subdivision of the project. Other projects have workgroups dealing with a particlar area of the project, with their own assessment categories, and I think that it would help this project to separate out the biographies. I'm aware that we don't currently have many people to form a separate workgroup, but I think that creating one now would:

• define an area of work which might be of interest to new recruits to the project and might even of use in recruiting Irish editors, by making things easier for anyone who would like to specialise in that area
• make it easier for existing project members to track assessments

Any thoughts on that? If there is a consensus in support of the idea, I'm happy to do the spadework of implementing it. --- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 15:45, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

BHGbot to tag WP:IE articles?

The discussions which I was having with a bot-owner seem to have stalled, so I have created User:BHGbot for the explicit purpose of doing this tagging. BHGbot can be run only if given approval, which I have sought at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval#BHGbot.

I would be grateful if project members could take a look at BHGbot's userpage and at the request for approval, and offer any comments here. Thanks -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 09:30, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

PS I should stress that I regard the discussion above as having amounted to support for the principle of having a bot auto-tag WP:IE articles. I will seek explicit approval here before running the bot on any set of articles. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 09:33, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I certainly approve and I think Wwcensor has supported the idea and...was it Flowerpotman? (My apologies, I thought this was going ahead and maybe the Bot had misfired or something!) ( Sarah777 11:02, 4 November 2007 (UTC))

I hoped that it was going ahead, but I seem to have lost contact with the bot owner, which is why I have created my own bot. Sorry if I'm asking people twice; I just want those entrusted with approving bots to be able to see clearly that there is consensus for this job to be done, tho maybe I am being a pedant again :) -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 11:43, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Can't be too careful around these here parts BH, there's a lotta folk just waiting to be riled!!( Sarah777 12:30, 4 November 2007 (UTC))

Some stupid questions, and please excuse my ignorance, but:

1. What is going to be tagged?
2. What is it going to be tagged with?
3. What is the benefit of it being tagged (not just by a bot, but why tag it to begin with)?
4. How is the bot going to decide what should be tagged?
5. Why can this not be done by hand?
6. etc. ... ?

Apologies again if these are stupid questions, but I'd just like to know what I'm supporting before letting a bot loose to plaster talk pages with what could potentially be WikiProject Ireland graffiti. I don't disagree in principle (in fact far from it - if it's benign, the let it rip), but I want to know the pros and cons. -- sony-youth ^pléigh 13:05, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

The only stoopid question is one that someone isn't sure of the answer to, but feels afraid to ask :) Will reply when I have had mine lunch. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 13:16, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

You could fit what I know about WP bots on the back of a matchbook, but my questions are largely the same as S-Y's, especially the one about how the bot will know what to tag. In theory, it sounds great. Dppowell 13:43, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

There is a bit of an explanation above at #Project_tagging_of_article_talk_pages, but that stuff rather presumes some prior knowledge which may not be the case, so I'll try to start at the beginning.

Like many other WikiProject, this project has a system for assessing articles. The cornerstone of that system is a tag, in this case {{ WikiProject Ireland}}, which is placed on the talk page of an article within the scope of the project. Some articles may fall within the scope of more than one project, in which case this project's tag may be one of several (For an example of how it may look, see Talk:Donabate). Some articles may be within the scope of more than one project, in which case they have have multiple tags (see e.g. Talk:Easter Rising)

These tags have two purposes: to alert editors discussing the article that there is a wikiproject involved, and to use the tag's parameters label how the project has been assessed in various ways. Those assessments also categorise the article in various ways, which is where the are particularly useful, not least because a bot compiles a table of statistics from the categories: see Wikipedia:WikiProject Ireland/Assessment.

(sorry, gotta go out now). Will complete this later. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs)

The only downside I see to auto tagging is one mentioned on another project I was looking at (don't remember which), that seeing a huge amount of unassessed articles can be a rather discouraging situation for some assessors, though for me, I may well see a number of several thousand unassessed articles, but it can slowly be whittled down in time. At least we see some sort of finite number however large it is. I am in favour of the bot tagging of all the untagged Irish articles. Cheers. ww2censor 16:43, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Sony-youth you might want to read this discussion on BHGs talk page for some more background to this tagging project. The estimate is that there are about 25,000 Irish articles - we have taken 3 months to go from 1,000 assessed articles to 5,000, so having a bot tag the untagged articles will save a lot of work finding articles. Believe me looking for untagged articles can be time consuming; finding some already tagged articles and maybe a few untagged in a category one stumbles across that seem to have been ignored by others takes time. The bot will only put in the basic tag without any assessments to quality or importance rating, except perhaps adding a "stub quality" tag if the article has a stub template on the main page. Otherwise all the auto tagged pages will appear on the statistics page as "Unassessed" and "None". Hope you understand now. ww2censor 16:43, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Yop - get it now, Ww. Sounds like a matter for the assessors. If you guys think that it will be of help to you in your much-appreciated and dogged effort then it's welcome by me. I take it it will go through the categories and search for untagged talk pages, yeah? Sounds like stubs can be auto assessed. -- sony-youth ^pléigh 23:42, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes and yes. Why not join us in doing some assessing, when you have nothing else to do! ww2censor 01:29, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Support,strongly. I'd rather know how high the mountain is, then whittling it down is easier to appreciate. And now that the suspected total has gone from sub-10k to 25k + articles... SeoR 09:20, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks to ww2censor for so clearly completing the explanation which I abandoned half-way. I don't think that there is anything more for me to say on the objectives, except on the subject of the biographical articles I abandoned above. Oh, and to add that I reckon it's much better to get this sort of thing right than to have tidy up a mess afterwards, so if/when the bot gets the go-ahead I'm going to split the job into batches and ask people to cast their eyes over the list beforehand. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 10:34, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

BHGbot progress

BHGbot has now completed its trial run, which is a required step along the way to full approval of a bot. The details are at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/BHGbot#Trial_run_complete, where comments are welcome. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 15:54, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

What's the fuss, Wikipedia Ireland is a dead duck, thanks to a small section of ego-centric individuals. Sarah777, you do excellent work, it's appreciated by your fellow editors. The Admins tried to cobble you too, and Vintagekits. They pulverized GH, and all he did was to fall in love in the wrong circumctance. And it's always classified evidence. Enough said! 19:53, 28 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.19.83.222 ( talk)

It wasn't a very live duck last August! Yep, anonymous users are ruining Wiki; that's why I'd strongly support registration!! ( Sarah777 20:18, 28 October 2007 (UTC))

Agree with registration, and I'll keep my user-name clean, I know all the parties involved, that's why I don't sign. Disagree with Anons running Wikipedia. It's been run by a gang of Admins, for whatever reason. Don't say anything about British genocide, but say as you like about Germany, France, The Vatican etc. Get it? 78.19.197.248 22:19, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I think you know I'd agree with you; just that this isn't really the place to discuss it....regardless of differences I think there is a core of good and serious editors here doing good work to make sure Ireland is well covered in Wiki. ( Sarah777 00:06, 29 October 2007 (UTC))

It's just that these Admins give me the reaches, on one hand trying their damnedest to crucify selected editors, and then later they come along and whistle for help with their "thing". It's not you Sarah777, didn't mean to get this involved, back tomorrow. My point is that the core is shrunk, no doubt you'll make up much of the diff!00:16, 29 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.19.197.248 ( talk)

• Yes, chase the vandals out of Wikipedia, but don't chase the editors out. Some of the admins are getting "sets" on some of the editors, and forcing them out. The 4 admins involved in the VK case are now proved wrong, and VK is now editing as he should be. 01:40, 3 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.19.98.83 ( talk)

Coming out from a few conversations, a Gaeilge task force has been established to coordinate the translation of Irish place names and other Irish-language related work. Anyone who wants to get invovled is invited to add their names to the list of participants or drop a line on the task force talk page.

Even those without Irish are invited - an outside view is always important, and I'm certain that there is plenty of work that can be done without the need for the Auld'Gaeilge! -- sony-youth ^pléigh 16:34, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Good work! Much needed. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 09:34, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Domer48 and I are having a disagreement about the inclusion/exclusion of a list section in the Great Irish Famine article. I feel we've reached an impasse and would welcome some fresh eyes at Talk:Great Irish Famine. Dppowell 00:33, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

One of the other side appears to have taken a bit of unilateral action on this! ( Sarah777 02:03, 1 November 2007 (UTC))

There's some pretty egregious WP:OWNing going on over there, not to mention violations of the recent arbitration ruling. There are grounds for escalation, but I'd prefer to treat that option as the last resort that it is. More editors taking an active interest in the article would be preferable...and would probably solve the WP:OWN issue in short order. I can't do more than I have without descending into an edit war. IMHO, it's one of the most important articles in the project, but it's in rough shape at the moment. Dppowell 02:29, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Been there, DP. A very tedious editor to find yourself embroiled in an argument with. Likewise, my poor experience was over something quite matter-of-fact and trivial. Chin up, OK? -- sony-youth ^pléigh 11:17, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, S-Y. It's no skin off my nose, personally, but the article is making me cringe. He "allowed" me to streamline the intro, at least. ;) Dppowell 15:19, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

If you want to help improve the article well lend a hand. Dppowell if you have a complaint bring it to the article mentors instead making accusations against fellow editors such as WP:OWN which can be considered a personal attack. Also your inability to assume good faith, and the personal nature of you last comment, should now be considered your final warning. Any and all help on the article is welcome, and editors should not be deflected by such adverse comments.-- Domer48 17:21, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Domer, please review WP:SPADE, particularly this part: "Users too often cite policies, like our policy against personal attacks and our policy against incivility, not to protect themselves from personal attacks, but rather to protect their edits from review." You have some deeply flawed ideas about how dialogue works on Wikipedia. You were censured for disruptive editing during the arbitration case, and you're back at it. Like I said yesterday, if you feel that I'm harrassing or attacking you, please bring it to the attention of other administrators. I think you'll discover that calling additional attention to your current behavior isn't the best idea you've ever had. Dppowell 17:29, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

"were censured for disruptive editing during the arbitration case?" No. "I think you'll discover that calling additional attention to your current behavior isn't the best idea you've ever had." I don't think so. "You have some deeply flawed ideas about how dialogue works on Wikipedia." Cite the diff's? Have a read of this this, and keep it in mind while on discussion pages. -- Domer48 20:04, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Without making any comment on whether the booklist should be included or not, I do wish to comment that remarks by both Sony and Dppowell breach WP:NPA. WP:SPADE is red herring. And least Domer be accused of "drumming up support", in my case he did no such thing. I watch everything. ( Sarah777 21:48, 1 November 2007 (UTC))

Sarah, WP:NPA is not intended to be used as a shield for editors to hide behind when their editorial behavior draws criticism, as Domer's has. If that makes him uncomfortable, and he perceives it as a personal attack, there's not much I can do about that. His continual blocking of other editors' changes to the article flies in the face of community standards, and I've called him on it. I'm far from the first person to do so, as the article history and the arbitration case show. Dppowell 22:55, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

I have done with this conversation, it has as much substance as a bottle of smoke. You resorted to canvassing support [1] [2], because you could not stand over your edit and defend it. You described it as a “List”, but could not defend it when I pointed you to WP:LIST. When you could not defend it using WP:LIST, you resorted to getting personal. [3] [4] [5] [6] When it was pointed out to you why you need to discuss the edit first [7] [8], you trew the rattle out of the cot [9], and ended up here. Now the discussion has moved on, there is some productive edits being made and suggested, and with luck, will continue. Notice the use of Diff’s, and that’s the difference, substance.-- Domer48 23:33, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

This idea that canvassing for additional editors to join the discussion is somehow uncouth is silly. That's what you're supposed to do when there's an impasse. I can easily imagine that it would make you uncomfortable. You can post diffs and wave signs about "substance" all you like, but the fact remains that you're trying to give special placement to a reading list that is only tangentially related to the subject of the article. That's my "defense" for removing it. Dppowell 23:52, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah, changing the nature of your complaint completely. You left out the bit from the article talk page about you now using WP:NPOV, as the basis of your complaint. Totally new. No matter, I would just suggest that you do not fall into the situation of just trying to make a point, and appearing unreasonable. So like I suggested on the article talk page, start a new section, for your new complaint, even though it’s the same WP:LIST. Still no Diff's? -- Domer48 00:07, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Domer, I'd be more concerned about your characterizations of my position if I didn't know that everyone here is able to read. Which I, again, invite others to do at Talk:Great Irish Famine. Dppowell 00:30, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

This like the previous conversation has gone stale, all I can suggest is, that when you’re in a whole, you should stop digging. I will not be drawn into petty little juvenile squabbles, something I learned from the arbitration. I’m here to edit and improve articles, so your wasting your time trying to goad me. In fact, in my opinion, you are just starting to sound silly, and by responding, I’m only encouraging you. Now there is some real discussion starting on the article, under the title “Government Response,” and I would welcome all interested editors to contribute, Thanks -- Domer48 00:55, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

{{RTEhosts}}

Does anyone either know how to edit this or know where the original is so I can edit it and add more hosts? -- Nengscoz416 00:41, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

I have converted it to use {{ Navbox}}, and it should now have an edit button. For documentation on the new format, see Template:Navbox. Hope this helps! -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 00:30, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

As part of the featured portal candidacy for Portal:Ireland a suggestion was made to make a "topics" template of major ("must read" backgrounders, etc.) Ireland-related articles. I've hacked the following together, but it's obviously lacking. Can people add/remove as they feel is important according to their interest. Changes appear immediately on the portal. Thanks. -- sony-youth ^pléigh 15:34, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Please can we add Bang Bang to the people section? -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 00:31, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

My mother remembers Bang-bang from some visits to the "Big Smoke" in the 1960s! ( Sarah777 02:15, 4 November 2007 (UTC))

Hey, I'm old enough to remember him myself. Never actually met him, but I enjoyed the accounts of others who did, and I did get to see the play "From the Vikings to Bang Bang" back in 1977 or thereabouts. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 09:36, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm working on the original Celtic tribes, recently creating these maps of their locations for Northern England and Southern England, I'm looking to do the same for Ireland, but sources are harder to come by. The sources for Ireland that I can find, name the tribes and show a basic location, but not the full borders [10] [11] (like the ones I've been able to create for England). I was wondering if anybody here knew of better sources to create this as guessing would be inaccurate. Thanks . - Yorkshirian 13:07, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

See:

• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 November 10#Irish_politicians_by_party
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 November 10#More_Irish_politicans

-- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 14:31, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

A new article on the Irish actor and writer (apparently), Paudge Behan, has been created by Lynsin and expanded by me. Please help to provide more information for the article if you can. In particular, an editor is required to transcribe Behan's name into IPA. Thanks. — Cheers, JackLee ^{– talk–} 03:39, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Good editing, Jack. I've removed the notability tag. It seems to have been added five minutes after the article was created by a user who does that sort of thing for a hobby. Scolaire 13:31, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I enjoy expanding articles I know little about – quite challenging! But there's a dearth of information on Paudge Behan, so help in finding more information to expand the article would be welcome. — Cheers, JackLee ^{– talk–} 23:22, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Lamhfionn is a brand new article that appears to relate to Irish mythology/history. Is it a viable article? Can you folks make it better? GRBerry 19:58, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi all! I'm not sure if this is the proper place (I know there's some sort of article request page on en-wiki somewhere else), but I'm wondering if anyone would like to collaborate on an article with me, specifically Fajujonu v. Minster of Justice. It's a fairly big case in Irish nationality/immigration law, and although the decision has been overturned by the Lobe and Osayande case (which would be another cool article to work on) and the 27th Amendment, it's definitely an important bit of information. I'd be more than happy to do the legwork (content and law review research), but I'm a bit hesitant to tackle it straight on by myself, as my knowledge of the finer points of law are wanting a bit. Thanks in advance, fellows! gaillimh ^{Conas tá tú?} 00:20, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Heck, looking for collaborators? Before my recent Arbcom I'd have supplied a few editors' names - but I'm on a tight leash...:) ( Sarah777 07:33, 14 November 2007 (UTC))

Katherine Plunket - although I've written her biography twice the article's size, she was feature in a local newspaper somewhere, so if anyone in Ireland thinks they can track down the newspaper and find her photo, that would be a rare find! But I thought she would be a useful article for you guys. Neal 12:43, 16 November 2007 (UTC).

Definitely unstubbable. Apart from her illustrious family, she was notable as one of Ireland's foremost botanical ilustrators. To my surprise, she also turns out to be at most three degrees of separation from me, each intermediate step involving my immediate family. I'm doing a big rewrite, and rescuing her from being merely an oldie, by recording her significant contribution to art and science in Ireland. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 00:16, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

PS I'm also disgusted to see that this reference describes her as "the oldest person in the history of England". This woman was born in Ireland of a notable Irish family, lived nearly all her life in Ireland where she established her career. That's one decidedly unreliable source, that is, if the authors haven't figured out that Ireland != England.</rant> -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 00:27, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

I haven't researched Katherine Plunket in a while. But when I last did, Googling her name and compiling all her sources, I came up with this:

Katherine was born in Kilsaran, County Louth, Ireland. She was a member of the Irish aristocracy. Her father was a clergyman when she was born, and later became a bishop, giving her the title the Honourable Katherine Plunket.

When Katherine was baptised at Kilsaran Church on December 13, 1820, her Christian name was recorded as Catherine, but later in life she spelt her name with a K. She was the oldest of 6 children, though 1 of them died soon after birth. She inherited a house in Ireland, and, for a time, had a house in London. She travelled a lot, visiting every capital city in Europe, often with her younger sister Gertrude. She was an amateur artist and made many sketches in Italy and Switzerland.

Katherine never married and outlived all her younger sisters. She faced no serious health problems except for a case of bronchitis at 102. She often claimed she never had a bad night's sleep in her life. For her birthdays she customarily feasted on roast turkey, plum pudding, and champagne.

When she reached the age of 109 she was sent a telegram of congratulation by King George V. Julia Hynes traced many articles about her in the Irish newspapers on her 103rd, 107th, 108th, 109th, 110th and 111th birthdays. When she died, King George V sent a telegram of condolence to her relatives. She had obituary notices in the London newspapers The Times and The Morning Post, and in the Irish newspapers. She was the last person alive to see the famous novelist Sir Walter Scott (1771-1832) alive.

In other words, from the last paragraph, she had a lot of media attention and obituaries, so I feel more info could be found of her in libraries than on the Internet. I did all the Internet research - just not all the off-line research as I'm geographically separated. Neal ( talk) 00:55, 23 November 2007 (UTC).

Wise Owl Bookshop
Submitted this article. Trying to find any additional online information if anyone has any - as referencing offline stuff is very difficult.

Gloworm747 ( talk) 12:22, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I just found out that this article's GA nominator is on vacation. Could someone else take a look at the GA review, and make necessary changes? If you have queries, leave a note on my talk page. Cheers, Dihydrogen Monoxide ^♫ 06:47, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Now and then we have editors (usually new ones) putting a bunch of badly-sourced info in the Irish and Scottish mythology articles. These folks are well-intentioned, I'm sure, but using bad sources (usually tertiary, Newage ones). I've seen some recent problems with a new user conflating Irish myths with Greek and English ones, which, while I suppose it would be acceptable to include a "comparative mythology" type section further down, when just plopped into the lead or main body of the article it is confusing and inappropriate. I'll try to clean up the ones I've come across, but if others could keep their eyes open as well, I'd appreciate it. Thanks. (Note, I was really disturbed to see part of Connla's Well ended up in a DYK bit on the Main Page, because that article was a mess. It still needs work, but was really not up to par when it was used for DYK.) - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦ ♫ 04:44, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

The following mergers have been proposed

• Ireland national football team (IFA) → Northern Ireland national football team
• Ireland national football team (FAI) → Republic of Ireland national football team

Proposal Talk:Ireland national football team IFA#Proposed_mergers with lead-up discussion earlier on that Talk: page. Fasach Nua ( talk) 09:33, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Most of my articles focus on Irish history prior to 1800, with a bias towards the learned classes. Would appreciate feedback and/or collaboration, as well as advice as to how to help in this particular project. Fergananim ( talk) 14:08, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello. I've been working on names within Wikiproject:Anthroponymy. Are Irish names, for example Fitzmaurice, candidates for a Talk page template? If so, which one? Any other policy pointers are appreciated, too. Thanks. Rosiestephenson ( talk) 23:29, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Rosie, excuse my ignorance, but what is "antroponymy"? And what kind of pointers would you like? -- sony-youth ^pléigh 17:14, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Maybe it should be "anthroponymy". ww2censor ( talk) 17:21, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

The Wikiproject: Anthroponymy is about the study of names. There are a lot of Irish origin given names and surnames, even nicknames. By creating/editing those articles, I thought I could be a contributor to Wikiproject:Ireland. Rosiestephenson ( talk) 19:01, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

I've created the template below based on the US county version. I've so far populated the Wicklow version of it; anyone wishing to make up versions for other counties? Perhaps it could be added to one of the to-do lists on the main page? Thanks. Schcambo ( talk) 15:16, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Schcambo; I think you should do maybe Carlow, Wexford, Kildare and Laois as well - to give us a feel for the thing :) Sarah777 ( talk) 15:24, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

I recommend that you set the nav box to be closed by default instead of the open display as now. On many small pages, where it will be used most, the open nav box overwhelms those pages and I so don't think it should to be open. Otherwise a decent idea. Cheers ww2censor ( talk) 16:43, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Done (the collapsed thing). Schcambo ( talk) 16:59, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Cool, that looks great. Thanks ww2censor ( talk) 17:08, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

I have tweaked it a little, and also created Template:County Sligo, which I have added to the relevant places. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 17:45, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

I think perhaps it would be better to leave it as "county seat"; the term "county town" is really just an outdated remnant of the days when there was only one slightly larger connurbation in every county which served as the center of government. It's a bit misleading now considering we have specified cities, boroughs, and towns, so I think "county seat" would be less subjective and more accurate. And I know it's an Americanism, which is why I had it redirecting to the UK/Ireland usage. Schcambo ( talk) 18:06, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

I have never heard of "county seat" used in an Irish context. Wikipedia tries to use existing termimnology, not to change it to something which someone considers more appropriate. Can you provide any references at all which support using "county seat" for Irish article? -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 19:36, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Yep - guess I never did either; certainly "county town" was the norm in my neck of the woods - but apart from that and the possible avalanche of non-notable townlands - its good? ( Sarah777 ( talk) 20:03, 23 December 2007 (UTC))

Mayo Co Co saying "Castlebar is the county seat of government where the Mayo County Council is headquartered" here; Limerick described as a "a city and the county seat of County Limerick in the province of Munster, in the midwest of Ireland" here, here, and here; Roscrea tourism saying "the county seat is Tipperary town" here; the Dept of Justice saying "Navan is the county seat of Co. Meath" here. It is actually quite a common usage nowadays; there are probably more instances if you keep looking. Schcambo ( talk) 20:24, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Keep looking - you're 2-1 in front but its only half time!! ( Sarah777 ( talk) 20:43, 23 December 2007 (UTC))

I'll give you three already on wiki then; from Newcastle, County Wicklow, "The Castle was the county seat and administrative centre until the shiring of Wicklow county in the 1500s when it moved to Wicklow Town after the castle was again raided"; from County Antrim, "More recently, Ballymena was the seat of county government"; and from Kilkenny, "Kilkenny is the county seat of County Kilkenny, Ireland." Is that enough?! Schcambo ( talk) 21:14, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough, it does seem to be used sometimes -- I just hadn't heard it at all.

But I did some google-testing of the two terms, searching for each of them on Irish websites, and "county town" remains the overwhelmingly-used term, as shown in the table on the right.

There was no particular reason for selecting those counties, and others may want to complete the list, but I don't see any reason to expect significantly different results for the other counties.

So it seems that "county town" is still the overwhelmingly-used term in popular usage. I started adding in columns for the same search restricted to the gov.ie domain, but gave up after two counties because "county town" still predominated. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 23:35, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

"Seat" is probably what they say when they want to be posh; like estate agents spelling Oughterard as Oughter Ard and so forth. That sounds like the final whistle over there! - Sarah777 ( talk) 01:08, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

I think it does prove however that "county seat" is an acceptable term; maybe a compromise would be that for counties which no longer have traditional "county towns", i.e. they have a city or a borough, as their location of local gov, the box would change to "county seat"? I think I could manage it. Schcambo ( talk) 12:29, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but the term "county seat" is clearly used so rarely that I don't think it's appropriate to have it in the template at all. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 01:10, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Reluctantly, I have to agree. ( Sarah777 ( talk) 01:30, 25 December 2007 (UTC))

Added Template:County_Kilkenny ( Okeeffe.christopher ( talk) 16:43, 13 February 2008 (UTC))

Great news! The Ireland portal has been made a featured portal, taking it's place along side the Scotland, London and North West England portals on these islands and the France and European Union portals on the continent.

p.s. Nollaig shonna diobh! -- sony-youth ^pléigh 18:32, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Removed cfdnotice, cfd has completed. -- Kbdank71 15:29, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

--
BrownHairedGirl 
(talk) • (
contribs) 11:08, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 January 8#Category:Non-article_Ireland_articles. The proposed renaming is probably a good idea, but a pity that the nominator didn't notify this project. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 11:52, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Geography of Ireland has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

Anyone here interested in helping out on this? It needs inline citations and checking of statistics. TIA ww2censor ( talk) 19:17, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Best people would be the original authors if they are still around; scanned the article - it will be a right pain-in-the **** to find references and add them. Sarah777 ( talk) 23:41, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Zonely is around and has been notified but most of the others are not. Cheers ww2censor ( talk) 03:23, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Maybe Zoney would do it? I have to say despite the missing references it is a fairly good and well written article. Geography is one of my favourite topics so I can attest from my own (unreferenced) WP:OR the nearly all the facts are correct. Sarah777 ( talk) 15:26, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I've listed it for peer review here. I'd appreciate it if someone would review, Cheers, Nousernamesleft ^{copper, not wood} 04:06, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Abbey Theatre has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Ceoil ( talk) 10:37, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Could someone here please have a look at the article ( Wikipedia talk:Notability seems like a poor place to bring it up), I'm thinking it may warrant an {{ obituary}} template as it stands now. I feel that the links from 1931(added by an Irish anonymous IP, perhaps the editor who started the article) and 2008 give it further weight and uncertain if it is warranted. Cheers, 88.148.195.147 ( talk) 18:21, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't see anything in that article to make him notable, I think it should be put up for Afd.-- Padraig ( talk) 18:29, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I have too agree with Padraig on this but would a speedy not be more efficient. ww2censor ( talk) 19:10, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.