Misplaced Pages

Talk:Provisional Irish Republican Army: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 15:44, 10 August 2012 editDomer48 (talk | contribs)16,098 edits Re Bold changes: Is this not a direct quote from DRN?← Previous edit Revision as of 15:51, 10 August 2012 edit undoSonofSetanta (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users4,972 edits Re Bold changesNext edit →
Line 83: Line 83:
No I wasn't Domer. You're resorting to bullying again and really must control yourself. DRN is about opinions and discussion and as my discussion point included sourced quotes by the well knmown Provo Martin McGuinness then it's very obvious that I wasn't relying on Original Research. You need to concentrate on your close reading skills? ] (]) 15:25, 10 August 2012 (UTC) No I wasn't Domer. You're resorting to bullying again and really must control yourself. DRN is about opinions and discussion and as my discussion point included sourced quotes by the well knmown Provo Martin McGuinness then it's very obvious that I wasn't relying on Original Research. You need to concentrate on your close reading skills? ] (]) 15:25, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
:So you weren't told that ]."]?--<font face="Celtic">]<sub>'']''</sub></font> 15:44, 10 August 2012 (UTC) :So you weren't told that ]."]?--<font face="Celtic">]<sub>'']''</sub></font> 15:44, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

No Domer but I have included a quote from a respected Republican who is also deputy leader of the Northern Ireland administration. Perhaps Wolfie and you missed that? Read it again and see if you can spot it. ] (]) 15:51, 10 August 2012 (UTC)


==Dispute Resolution Requested== ==Dispute Resolution Requested==

Revision as of 15:51, 10 August 2012

Former good article nomineeProvisional Irish Republican Army was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 1, 2012Good article nomineeNot listed
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Provisional Irish Republican Army 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, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13Auto-archiving period: 3 months 
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Provisional Irish Republican Army 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, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13Auto-archiving period: 3 months 
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconIreland High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject IrelandTemplate:WikiProject IrelandIreland
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconIrish republicanism Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Irish republicanism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Irish republicanism and Irish nationalism related topics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Irish republicanismWikipedia:WikiProject Irish republicanismTemplate:WikiProject Irish republicanismIrish republicanism
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconNorthern Ireland Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Northern Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Northern Ireland on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Northern IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject Northern IrelandTemplate:WikiProject Northern IrelandNorthern Ireland-related
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconCrime and Criminal Biography: Terrorism
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Terrorism task force (assessed as Mid-importance).
Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Troubles, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

  • You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on this article (except in limited circumstances)
  • Neutrality: All editors on Troubles-related articles are directed to get the advice of neutral parties via means such as outside opinions.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on July 28, 2008, July 28, 2009, and July 28, 2010.
There is a clear guideline on Misplaced Pages about the use of the word Terrorism. Please read it before editing.

Referring to the Electoral and popular support Paragraph

User:One Night In Hackney reverted an edit I made on this paragraph. Firstly there were no local elections held in 1981 in the RoI. While there were ones held in NI no SF candidates stood. Secondly the wordpress website I referred to - irishelectionliterature - contained a number of excel spreadsheets which listed the results of local elections in the Republic of Ireland including the ones for Monaghan and Leitrim County Council. I'll provide the link again: http://irishelectionliterature.wordpress.com/others-project/old-local-election-results/ .The site has been used as a reference in other articles . Exiledone (talk) 17:38, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

No claim is being made that local elections were held in 81. Mo ainm~Talk 18:38, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

The original source is too cofused to be used, and wordpress sites aren't reliable sources see WP:V. It isn't being used in a single article as a source as I just removed all of them, since it isn't reliable. That's the thing about Misplaced Pages, we don't do things per other articles as they can be changed at any second, we do things per guidelines and policies which are generally stable. 2 lines of K303 10:47, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

You'd want to have the intelligence of a digestive biscuit to deem that source as being "too confused". I fail to see how it is unreliable. It tallies with the results on electionsireland. And also why would the creater of the site actually bother to fake all those documents.

Exiledone (talk) 16:42, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Erm, it would appear you do indeed have the intelligence of a digestive biscuit, since I refered to the "original source", not the wordpress site *rolls eyes* Nice of you to remind me about the other problem with the site that I hadn't mentioned yet, namely it hosts many documents in violation of copyright and therefore can't be linked to per WP:LINKVIO. 2 lines of K303 10:21, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Infobox strength

Removed the unsourced part, namely "~1,000 in 2002, of which ~300 in active service units". I originally added the sourced part of ~10,000 here, then unsourced additions were made to that here and here. 2 lines of K303 19:47, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. I was about to delete the 2002 figure since I didn't find it in Moloney's book, but I wasn't sure thus I only reverted the IP edit.--Darius (talk) 19:56, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

RUC not a reliable source?

A statement from a 1998 newspaper article based on an RUC report was removed on the grounds that citing the RUC breaches WP:NPOV. The author of the article seems to fulfil the requirements of WP:SOURCES and WP:THIRDPARTY, and the info is presented in an objective way, expressly mentioning that the RUC document is the primary source and Horgan and Taylor a secondary source. Any suggestions?--Darius (talk) 23:01, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

It does breach WP:NPOV as Horgan and Taylor are only repeating the claims made by the RUC. Also, the head of the Garda National Drugs Unit (the gardaí certainly aren't pally with the IRA) said there is "no evidence to suggest paramilitary figures are involved in drug dealing". http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2005/0829/1122072845392.html --CommieMark (talk) 03:20, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
You removed reliable, verifiable sources. If you have a source that disputes the other sources, please add it. But, do not remove cited material. Thank you. ---RepublicanJacobiteTheFortyFive 13:30, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
One source added doesn't support the claim being made, the other isn't relevant due to it countering an accusation that isn't being made. 2 lines of K303 21:13, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Name

"The Provisional Irish Republican Army (IRA) (Gaeilge: Óglaigh na hÉireann) is an Irish republican paramilitary organisation whose aim was to remove Northern Ireland from the United Kingdom and bring about a socialist republic within a united Ireland by force of arms and political persuasion."

OK, so "Óglaigh na hÉireann" is the name of the "original" IRA and also the "provisional" IRA established around 1969 , and also apparently the official name of the defence force of Ireland ( the Republic of ).

So in the Irish language, are these disambiguated at all ? Or is "provisional" some kind of invisible word in Irish ?Eregli bob (talk) 15:08, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

There isn't a 'direct' translation for it into English. It is taken to mean volunteer soldiers/men of Ireland or similar. It is a loosely interpreted phrase which is why it easily lends itself to different groups and organisations.SRaemiA 02:40, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
"Provisional IRA" is translated into Irish as IRA Sealadachsealadeach being the Irish for "provisional"—but "Provisional Irish Republican Army" does not have an Irish translation, because the Provisionals never called themselves "Provisionals". They called themselves, and are generally called by others, simply the Irish Republican Army, or Óglaigh na hÉireann. Scolaire (talk) 15:08, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Re Bold changes

This lead has been stable for a while now so could editors please discuss their bold changes to the lead after being reverted rather than attempting to force them through against consensus.--Domer48'fenian' 18:29, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

The reasons for the censorship of the official Irish name are spurious. If for a second we accept that Misplaced Pages is somehow bound by Irish law (and "Óglaigh na hÉireann is the legal name of the Irish Defence Force - Section 3, Defence Forces (Temporary Provisions) Act 1923. also Section 16, Defence Act 1954" doesn't prove that the use of the name is illegal) then we'd better remove the English name too per S.I. No. 162/1939 — Unlawful Organisation (Suppression) Order, 1939. Just to expand on the Defence Act 1954, Section 16 reads "It shall be lawful for the Government to raise, train, equip, arm, pay and maintain defence forces to be called and known as Óglaigh na hÉireann or (in English) the Defence Forces". It does not say it's unlawful for anyone else to use the name, that's a conclusion being drawn from a primary source that isn't present in the source. Section 3 of the Defence Forces (Temporary Provisions) Act 1923 doesn't even contain the phrase "Óglaigh na hÉireann". 2 lines of K303 21:27, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
It might help if it was made more clear exactly who uses the term to refer to PIRA. After all when someone in Ireland says Óglaigh na hÉireann he means the Irish defence forces. Also, as I understand it, "Óglaigh na hÉireann" is not a translation of "Irish Republican Army." It seems to be a useage favoured only by PIRA themselves and perhaps that could be made clear somehow. If someone was to search for Óglaigh na hÉireann on WP or any other quality reference source they're not going to find PIRA, so some confusion could result.--FergusM1970 22:32, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
When someone in Ireland says Óglaigh na hÉireann what he (or she) means depends on the context. An English-speaker generally doesn't use the term at all! "The Army" (for the defence forces) or "the IRA" is what is commonly used. An Irish-speaker generally doesn't use the term at all either! "an tAirm" or "an tIRA" are the preferred names. Óglaigh na hÉireann was originally a loose translation of "The Irish Volunteers". When the Volunteers became the IRA, it continued to be translated as Óglaigh na hÉireann. When the pro-Treaty IRA was replaced by the National Army. that continued to be translated as Óglaigh na hÉireann. So the claim of any IRA to the Irish title of Óglaigh na hÉireann is as valid or more valid than that of the Defence Forces. Far from banning the use of the name, Irish legislation actually recognises that "illegal organisations" go by this name! But in fact this is much ado about nothing because you won't find a media source that says "Óglaigh na hÉireann did this or that", so there is no danger of confusion about which "Óglaigh na hÉireann" is being referred to. Scolaire (talk) 21:24, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
In fact, I looked up "Oglaigh na hEireann" in Google Books and guess what? Only two out of twenty books on the first two pages (and both of them "no cover image" and "no preview") are primarily about the Defence Forces. Some of the others note that Ó na hÉ is also the name of the IDF, but to say that it is the primary usage of Ó na hÉ seems entirely unjustified on the basis of this search. Scolaire (talk) 23:06, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Scolaire I always read your very informed comments and opinion with great interest. I take on bnoard all of your points. May I ask you to consider this (http://www.independent.ie/national-news/mcguinness-says-army-is-oglaigh-na-heireann-2891290.html) however and give me your considered opinion? I'd be very grateful. SonofSetanta (talk) 18:13, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I read that when I was doing my Google search on Wednesday. It illustrates nicely my point above that "what he or she means depends on the context." The context here was a man going for the job of commander-in-chief of the IDF, and he used the term in a dramatic way to indicate that he acknowledged the legitimacy of the IDF and that as president he would be loyal to them. He did not say – and it would be stretching it to say he meant – that it is wrong to style the IRA as Óglaigh na hÉireann. I imagine if you asked him if that was his position you would get a short, sharp answer. Scolaire (talk) 07:54, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Scolaire I fully agree with you. It is not wrong to "style" any IRA grouping as Óglaigh na hÉireann. There are good, solid historical reasons for them to do so. My point here is that this must be pointed out in the article. What we have at the moment is a school of thought which says this was their "official" name and that it is also the translation into Irish. Neither is true, as Martin McGuinness says: it is a "styling". Therefore the item must be rewritten to show the correct etymology of the name and why PIRA chose to use it. SonofSetanta (talk) 13:56, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

At the Dispute resolution noticeboard you were told that "Your reasoning for removing the mention amounts to original research." Please listen to what is being said. --Domer48'fenian' 15:11, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

No I wasn't Domer. You're resorting to bullying again and really must control yourself. DRN is about opinions and discussion and as my discussion point included sourced quotes by the well knmown Provo Martin McGuinness then it's very obvious that I wasn't relying on Original Research. You need to concentrate on your close reading skills? SonofSetanta (talk) 15:25, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

So you weren't told that "Your reasoning for removing the mention amounts to original research."?--Domer48'fenian' 15:44, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

No Domer but I have included a quote from a respected Republican who is also deputy leader of the Northern Ireland administration. Perhaps Wolfie and you missed that? Read it again and see if you can spot it. SonofSetanta (talk) 15:51, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Dispute Resolution Requested

Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard#Provisional Irish Republican Army SonofSetanta (talk) 17:12, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Categories:
Talk:Provisional Irish Republican Army: Difference between revisions Add topic