| Revision as of 23:49, 18 February 2024 editPamD (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers206,521 edits →List of mountains and hills of County Dublin: ReplyTag: Reply← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 12:17, 15 January 2025 edit undoBastun (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers26,354 edits →Alteration of department names and ministerial titles: r | ||
| (126 intermediate revisions by 40 users not shown) | |||
| Line 60: | Line 60: | ||
| * ] |age=30 |bot=Lowercase sigmabot III}} | * ] |age=30 |bot=Lowercase sigmabot III}} | ||
| == Discussion at ] == | |||
| ] There is a requested move discussion at ] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ] (]) 14:34, 18 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Good article reassessment for ] == | |||
| == Celtic Knot 2024 in Waterford Survey Reminder == | |||
| ] has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the ]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ] (]) 16:48, 28 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Requested move at ] == | |||
| ☘️ Interested in coming to the Celtic Knot Conference 2024? Let us know what you would like to see by filling out the Community Survey by January 21st: https://wikimedia.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_erCHFhEJyzrO46i | |||
| ] There is a requested move discussion at ] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ] (]) 02:11, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Can we link articles of business people and business created by Irish immigrants? == | |||
| ☘️ Líon amach an suirbhé! Táimid ag ullmhú An Chomhdháil Celtic Knot 2024, beidh do chuid tuairimí an-tábhachtach dúinn chun tuiscint a fháil ar cad atá uait agus ó Mhuintir na Gaeilge agus na Gaeltachta ón gcomhdháil seo. | |||
| Could I link ] and the company he had created ] to here? ] (]) 16:35, 6 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :It looks like its linked already on the talk page to WikiProject Ireland? ] (]) 17:06, 6 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == Move of all Luas stop articles == | |||
| == ] == | |||
| ] There is a move discussion at ] that may be of interest to members of WikiProject Ireland. ] (]) 12:47, 24 January 2024 (UTC) | |||
| Can somebody please find and add reliable sources to this stub? ] (]) 22:08, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == Merger discussion at ] == | |||
| == Good article reassessment for ] == | |||
| ] There is a merger discussion at ] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ] (]) 16:29, 24 January 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ] has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the ]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ] (]) 03:05, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| == Articles on March 2024 referendums and amendment bills == | |||
| Can someone please expand this from the Gaelic article, or find additional sources? ] (]) 02:53, 12 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| Each bill put to a referendum has its own article. We also have pages for dates on which there is more than one referendum. See, for example, ], with the ] (marriage equality) and the ] (age of eligibility for president). | |||
| :. Based on other sources. ] not really useful as a basis for expansion. ] (]) 21:24, 12 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| Should we be following that approach with the ] (month included in the title because of the scheduled, if not finalised, referendum on the patent court in June)? In that way, keeping detail on the wording and campaigns on the separate pages of ] and ]. On the other hand, given how much the campaigns will have in common, it might make sense to give more of the details on the campaign and support for or opposition to the two proposals on the referendums article, rather than the separate amendment articles. Previous cases where there were two or more on related topics, such as ] or ] give guidance, although needn't determine the approach. | |||
| ::Thank you! ] (]) 04:04, 13 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == Alteration of department names and ministerial titles == | |||
| {{u|Bogger}}, {{u|Ccferrie}}, {{u|Spideog}} and {{u|Spleodrach}}, who have made substantive contributions to the referendums article, might have a view one way or the other. Just seems like the kind of thing to consider at the start of the formal campaign. ] (]) 19:30, 25 January 2024 (UTC) | |||
| We can expect a new government to be announced this day week, with the usual changes to government departments. Could I suggest that no articles on departments or ministers be moved until a later date, when titles are confirmed? (see my ]) | |||
| :Consistency, taking its cue from an established pattern, can be valuable or, ], "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds". | |||
| :My initial instinct is to cover the referendums in one article, with suitable redirects pointing to it, because they both deal with related questions: What is a family, and what is a woman's role at home and at work? | |||
| To give one example from 2020, , Martin announced that Ryan would be assigned the Department of Climate Action, Communications Networks and Transport. Then , he confirmed Ryan's appointment to the Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment and to the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport. By separate orders and , these departments were renamed as the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications and the Department of Transport. | |||
| :For that matter, the three articles ], ], and ] should also be merged (with suitable redirects) since those three referendums, held on the same day, were about the same topic of abortion. | |||
| :I will revisit the question after I have time to pore over the articles and the question raised more carefully. ] (]) 20:41, 25 January 2024 (UTC) | |||
| We could use piped links as a temporary approach, e.g. if the government announce on 22 January that Energy is moving to Enterprise, we could have that on ] as <code><nowiki>]</nowiki></code>. Once we see an order with confirmation of the new name, we can move the articles and edit the target links. | |||
| :I'd be happy to have the single article ], splitting in the future only if the campaigns diverge in terms of coverage, notability, campaign groups etc. -] (]) 21:46, 25 January 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :: And I'd also support a single article unless strong reasons for more emerge. And further, I'd support merging those on the 12-14th Amendments; I never did see the logic of separate articles for those, three wholly interlinked questions. ] (]) 00:14, 26 January 2024 (UTC) | |||
| Tagging {{u|Bastun}}, {{u|Marcocapelle}} and {{u|SeoR}}, who commented on my previous post, and {{u|Boardwalk.Koi}}, {{u|CeltBrowne}}, {{u|Edl-irishboy}}, {{u|Guliolopez}}, {{u|Lough Swilly}}, {{u|Lucky102}}, {{u|Sheila1988}}, and {{u|Spleodrach}} as other active editors on Irish politics. ] (]) 12:08, 15 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ::Also agreed, a single article makes sense. ]<sup>]</sup> 00:33, 26 January 2024 (UTC) | |||
| * Still makes sense! :-) ]<sup>]</sup> 12:17, 15 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| Great to see a consensus, and though I had started moving in the other direction with my edits, it makes a lot of sense. Even if there is any divergence in the result or if there are some organisations calling for a split vote, it will be useful to show this together on one page. Similarly, the same with the 1992 votes, that there was a No/Yes/Yes from many groups, as well as No/No/No from others, is a useful comparison, in a way that a divergence between marriage equality and the presidential age is only trivial. ] (]) 06:45, 26 January 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :I would agree with the single article approach for the campaign. To date all the parties and civil society groups that have declared a position on the referendums are supporting both and there could be a lot of repetition if we have two separate articles. Having said that, when it gets to documenting the results, two separate articles might be more appropriate. ] (]) 09:29, 26 January 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::::''when it gets to documenting the results, two separate articles might be more appropriate'' | |||
| ::There is no need for separate articles for reporting results given the well-established pattern of numerous past constitutional amendment articles reporting multiple results in one article, viz: in ], ], ], ], | |||
| ::], ] (four results in one article), ], ], and ]. ] (]) 14:14, 17 February 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ===1968 and 1992 mergers=== | |||
| Following this discussion, I've proposed that we merge the two previous occasions we've had multiple ballots on closely related topics. | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| Working on combined articles for these (if agreed) should inform how we handle the results section of a combined article for the upcoming votes. ] (]) 11:06, 5 February 2024 (UTC) | |||
| {{u|Spideog}}, {{u|Bogger}}, {{u|Scolaire}}, {{u|SeoR}}, {{u|Bastun}}, {{u|Ccferrie}} or {{u|Spleodrach}}, any thoughts on the two proposals above (corrected after I’d accidentally mixed them up!) ] (]) 15:03, 7 February 2024 (UTC) | |||
| : Thanks. I've thought about it further, and for these two cases, firmly support mergers. ] (]) 00:19, 8 February 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::FWIW, the discussion has continued on ], and I think it is converging towards no consensus. ] (]) 13:45, 17 February 2024 (UTC) | |||
| '''Support merges''': The dispersal of merger discussions across multiple article talk pages and here in WikiProject Ireland is exasperating. I suggest we centralise the discussions in one location (I prefer this location) and place notices in any relevant talk pages directing interested parties here. | |||
| It only struck me yesterday that Misplaced Pages treatment of Irish constitutional amendments is illogically split over two or more articles, for example, we have (Article 1) ] and then we have three more articles: (Article 2) ], (Article 3) ], and (Article 4) ]. This scattered treatment is offensive. The four articles should be merged into one, with redirects pointing to that one article. | |||
| If I was dictator for a day like Donald Trump's fantasy for next January, I would go on a wholesale merging binge to impose order and consistency on the mess collected in ]. I don't know why it became a pattern to have, for example, ] plus ] and ]. The three articles should be one because atomising the discussion is both disorderly and illogical which either sends the reader to three different places for one event or risks the reader missing part of the treatment of the occasion. There is also the problem of repetition between articles. | |||
| I have read a few of these articles in the past without realising until yesterday that by reading ] I could easily not recognise that there are two related articles: ] and ]. | |||
| Even if two amendments voted on, on the same day, are not related in content they are nevertheless contemporaneous events and there is obvious logic in combining them to tidy this unnecessary mess which risks making related material invisible to an unwary reader. | |||
| Merge, baby, merge. Merge the discussions we're having, then merge the articles. ] (]) 16:26, 18 February 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :By "merge the discussions we're having" I mean place notices on all relevant {{tq|constitutional amendment}} and {{tq|referendum}} Talk pages saying that centralised discussion is taking place (here) at ]. ] (]) 16:35, 18 February 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::I can understand your exasperation at the duplication! Even in the meantime, I had crafted a separate response over on ] within the next half hour! My apologies for this dispersal. | |||
| ::The way I see it, it makes sense to have a separate article for ], with an overview of the ] and the ] as marriage equality and the age of eligibility for election to the office of president were entirely separate subjects; someone who wants to know the background to the relatively obscure proposal to amend the age of eligibility would get lost in the material on marriage equality. Or a reader studying the abolition of the death penalty by country could get lost in the ] in the debate on the Nice Treaty if they were all combined. It's different for the 1968, November 1992, and March 2024 referendums, as in each case, these were proposals on related questions, proposed together, debated together. I had opened separate merger discussions even there though, someone might have a subtle case of Yes for merger in 1968 for No in 1992. ] (]) 17:03, 18 February 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::I recognise your argument about two different topics being voted on in one day but that is easily dealt with in one article such as {{tq|2029 Irish constitutional referendums}} within which are two sections: {{tq|Amendment to permit strangling of babies at birth}} and {{tq|Amendment to prohibit fake tans}}. The results of each vote would appear in the appropriate sections within the article. | |||
| :::Even if there is only one amendment being voted on, it makes no sense to have two articles: {{tq|2029 Irish constitutional referendum}} and {{tq|Amendment to permit strangling}}. The lead paragraph would say two (or more) issues were voted on in the 2029 referendum then the reader could browse whichever section is of interest. This would tame the messy sprawl and cure the problem of repetition between articles. ] (]) 17:25, 18 February 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Requested move at ] == | |||
| ] There is a requested move discussion at ] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ] (]) 16:59, 30 January 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Requested move at ] == | |||
| ] There is a requested move discussion at ] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ] (]) 14:52, 1 February 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| I found this when working on ] the February drive to eliminate/reduce the backlog of unreferenced articles. I've added a single source, ''PeakVisor'', not 100% sure of its reliability, which has a list of 41 summits. The Misplaced Pages list is a set of names, some linked, many not linked, with no further information or sources. I contemplated taking it to AfD, but sourced it and moved on, changing the template from {{tl|unreferenced}} to {{tl|refimprove}}. | |||
| the website (aka Database of British and Irish Hills), which I think is a ], includes Irish mountains like , but its search function doesn't seem to be working today. Some of the smaller lumps and bumps may not be included in it anyway. (Like the 36m , the smallest listed in PeakVisor.) | |||
| Someone with access to good sources (a book, perhaps?) on Irish hills and mountains might like to work this up into a more useful list, and to check that the list in {{tl|Mountains and hills of County Dublin}} matches the list in the article. | |||
| Over to you. ]] 12:56, 9 February 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :I note that the article's creator, {{u|Spideog}}, is still an active project contributor. And could perhaps review/assist. Otherwise, to my mind and if referencing of the standalone article is an issue, the title could potentially be retargeted to ]. ] (]) 13:08, 9 February 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :I've mentioned this at ] ]] 13:15, 9 February 2024 (UTC) | |||
| : I have made a good beginning by researching and citing a reliable source to cover the deficiencies. It should be easy to find more; it's just a question of finding time, which I will do. ] (]) 05:14, 17 February 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::Most of the mountains and hills now have citations, with just a handful of stragglers to be completed. ] (]) 16:39, 18 February 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::@] I've now managed to get a "County Dublin" list from Hill Bagging / DBIH, and it lists 16 - 3 of which weren't in your list. One is an alternative name, and I've added a note at the bottom about the other two. | |||
| :::What criterion did you use for your list of 46? It would be useful to add a note to the list to explain it. Thanks. | |||
| :::Ah, I've just noticed that ] is listed, so Knockbrack is included ... will tweak the footnote. ]] 23:00, 18 February 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::::@] Thank you, PamD. I created the list 13½ years ago so I can't remember my source(s) for the entries or what criteria I may have used. One or two other editors added a few peaks, but most of it is my work. | |||
| ::::I do recall that when compiling ] in 2010 I used a physical map (''Map of Ireland No. 923; 1998. Michelin Tyre PLC'') and also "circumnavigated" the entire Irish coast using a very detailed government Ordnance Survey map, online, but I have no memory of researching the uplands of Dublin. ] (]) 23:41, 18 February 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Ah well, it's a much better sourced list now than it was a few days ago, so thank you for upgrading it! This ] project is leading me off into all sorts of tangents, but I'm here to enjoy editing and be useful, rather than to climb up the leaderboard of that project. ]] 23:49, 18 February 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Town v Village == | |||
| Note that ] are ongoing again. While raised at ] and ], as multiple IPs (within the same range) are involved, other editors might wish to verify whether any related changes are consistent with the applicable sources. ] (]) 20:11, 16 February 2024 (UTC) | |||
| : Interesting. Is this the person, I wonder, who edited Caherciveen one way, and later, in pique, the opposite way… Will cast an eye anyway. There may be issues with this classification worth further debate, but not now, and random IP edits definitely don’t help. ] (]) 23:55, 16 February 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Department of Agriculture & Technical Instruction, Dublin, 1909 == | |||
| Please see ] and see if you can identify any of the personalities depicted, or assist with transcription of the comments. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); ]; ]</span> 14:06, 17 February 2024 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 12:17, 15 January 2025
|
Irish Wikipedians' notice board | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Home
Irish Wikipedians' related news |
Discussion
Ireland related discussion (at WikiProject Ireland). |
Active Users
Active Irish Users |
WikiProjects
Irish WikiProjects |
Stubs
Major Irish stubs |
Peer review
Articles on Peer review |
FA
Articles on FA review |
FA Drive
Articles under consideration for FA drive |
 FA |  A |  GA | B | C | Start | Stub | FL | List | Category | Disambig | Draft | File | Portal | Project | Redirect | Template | NA | ??? | Total |
| 69 | 0 | 249 | 1,522 | 5,700 | 30,734 | 26,961 | 8 | 3,427 | 26,266 | 184 | 75 | 181 | 26 | 20 | 2,945 | 3,238 | 30 | 2 | 101,637 |
 | WikiProject Ireland was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on March 2010. |
Discussion at Talk:Plastic Paddy#"refugees" / "genocide"
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Plastic Paddy#"refugees" / "genocide" that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Guliolopez (talk) 14:34, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Cú Chulainn
Cú Chulainn has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 16:48, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Disney Channel (British and Irish TV channel)#Requested move 13 December 2024
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Disney Channel (British and Irish TV channel)#Requested move 13 December 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. RachelTensions (talk) 02:11, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
Can we link articles of business people and business created by Irish immigrants?
Could I link William Russell Grace and the company he had created W.R. Grace to here? Starlighsky (talk) 16:35, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- It looks like its linked already on the talk page to WikiProject Ireland? D1551D3N7 (talk) 17:06, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Askill
Can somebody please find and add reliable sources to this stub? Bearian (talk) 22:08, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Euro area crisis
Euro area crisis has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 03:05, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
Tonragee
Can someone please expand this from the Gaelic article, or find additional sources? Bearian (talk) 02:53, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- Done. Based on other sources. Equivalent GA article not really useful as a basis for expansion. Guliolopez (talk) 21:24, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you! Bearian (talk) 04:04, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
Alteration of department names and ministerial titles
We can expect a new government to be announced this day week, with the usual changes to government departments. Could I suggest that no articles on departments or ministers be moved until a later date, when titles are confirmed? (see my previous comments in October 2020)
To give one example from 2020, on 27 June, Martin announced that Ryan would be assigned the Department of Climate Action, Communications Networks and Transport. Then on 7 July, he confirmed Ryan's appointment to the Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment and to the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport. By separate orders on 15 September and on 22 September, these departments were renamed as the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications and the Department of Transport.
We could use piped links as a temporary approach, e.g. if the government announce on 22 January that Energy is moving to Enterprise, we could have that on government of the 34th Dáil as ]. Once we see an order with confirmation of the new name, we can move the articles and edit the target links.
Tagging Bastun, Marcocapelle and SeoR, who commented on my previous post, and Boardwalk.Koi, CeltBrowne, Edl-irishboy, Guliolopez, Lough Swilly, Lucky102, Sheila1988, and Spleodrach as other active editors on Irish politics. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 12:08, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
- Still makes sense! :-) Bastun 12:17, 15 January 2025 (UTC)