Talk:Limerick/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2

Photos Section

A photo section added, and some really good photos of Limerick City too, I am looking to incorporate many of these photos into the article better. Also looking for a photo of the Art College and Mary I to add to the education section. --Lukemcurley (talk) 12:43, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

IMOS

Per IMOS, the second mention of Ireland need not use the pipe (e.g. Ireland) nor should it use it unpiped (e.g. Republic of Ireland). It is permitted / recommended to use "Ireland". Editor Murry's use of "Ireland" in his edits is therefore correct in my opinion. Laurel Lodged (talk) 09:51, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

I have changed to 'the state', for clarity. The IMOS distinction may be clear to editors familiar with the issue but not, I think, to the casual reader. RashersTierney (talk) 10:26, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
Rashers is right, it may be clear to people already familiar with the issue, but we need to take a step back sometimes and remember we're writing for those who wish to find out more. "Cloudiest city in Ireland" isn't clear to someone to not well-versed in the intricacies of the political situation on the island. — JonCॐ 11:08, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Page Move?

I think this article shall be better placed at Limerick (city) than at Limerick. In my opinion the type of poetry is more widely known and Limerick must redirect to Limerick(poetry) with a hatnote. Any thoughts on this? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 07:28, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Read the above, where primacy was giving. Murry1975 (talk) 06:36, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Cities rank before forms of poetry. Laurel Lodged (talk) 20:52, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
This page has been moved by User:Red Slash without discussion, and, as can be seen above, with no consensus - please move it back to Limerick. Brocach (talk) 18:12, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
Agree — the page should NOT have been moved without discussion, epecially as there was a move discussion further up this page that was inconclusive about another name.--A bit iffy (talk) 19:04, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
This page must be returned to Limerick if there was no discussion before hand. Shocker. FruitMonkey (talk) 19:20, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
This page should not have been moved without a discussion. Needs an RM to be opened. Snappy (talk) 19:31, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Recent move

There have been multiple proposals of a move with varying levels of officiality over the years, as I noticed--however, not once has there ever been established a consensus to keep a city with less than 100,000 people in the metro area as the primary topic, when other very significant meanings exist. Without a doubt, people looking for Limerick (poetry) would type in Limerick... and I daresay there's no primary topic whatsoever for this title. An RM could be used to determine this? Red Slash 18:21, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Note: there is a discussion in the previous section.--A bit iffy (talk) 19:08, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
As per requests... Red Slash 20:53, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of Stab City Redirect to this page

I have started a discussion on the deletion of the Stab City redirect to this page on the grounds that it is an inflammatory redirect, The discussion can be found at the link [1] Squidlimerick (talk) 12:38, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Today I noticed someone had slipped a reference in for this. I have deleted the reference which discussions years ago agreed would be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Irishpat77 (talk • contribs) 21:14, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

The Stab city redirect was created again; I've nominated it for speedy deletion on the grounds that this was already discussed and deleted back in 2008. Other discussions happened here Talk:Limerick/Archive_1#Stab_City. --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 21:36, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Requested move 2013

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was not moved, although it's really borderline no consensus territory. Either way, nothing's moving. --BDD (talk) 22:54, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

– No primary topic. City in Ireland of roughly 50k residents (~100k in metro area), the county that it is a part of, a couple of well-known poetic and musical terms, various smaller cities, a style of knitting lace, etc., all combine to make it clear to me that we have absolutely no primary topic. According to WP:PRIMARYTOPIC to avoid having Limerick be a disambiguation page, the city would either have to be far more likely to be searched for as this name than other topics (dubious, as both the poem and the city are significant topics) or one would have to have a substantially greater long-term significance, which seems unlikely to me (the form of poetry has been around 120+ years, and the city for far longer; none of the main meanings are transitory or anywhere near insignificant). Obviously, most if not all other uses are named after the city, but nowhere in any policy or guideline that I am aware of does that mean the Irish city must (or should) be the primary topic. Relisted. Favonian (talk) 22:32, 27 April 2013 (UTC). Red Slash 20:53, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

As per many excellent suggestions, the better target would be Limerick (city), like with Cork (city). Red Slash 04:16, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Support per 2010 move request and this one. Clearly the poetry topic should either be primary, or the disambiguation page should be. -- 70.24.250.103 (talk) 22:32, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose per the "usage" and "long-term significance" tenets of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. On usage, while not entirely scientific, Google hits for the city (but not the poery form) are in the 38 million range. But hits for the poem (but not city) are in the 4 million range. On long-term significance, I would note that the place in Ireland has been so-named for centuries longer than a pop-culture form of verse. (And would point out that the form of verse [along with pretty much every other usage] derives from the original placename. The proposer suggests that root/derivation is not an argument under policy in itself. However, root/derivation does (IMO) support the "long-term significance" argument. Which IS guideline/policy). Guliolopez (talk) 00:15, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
PS. The proposer argues that "most if not all other uses are named after the city, but nowhere in any policy [...] does that mean the [... root derivation should ..] be the primary topic". I agree with the first part of this. But not the second. As per my note above, while there is no specifically framed policy which suggests that the root/derivation "trumps" other uses, there is a "long-term significance" guideline. Of which "root/derivation" is a factor. Take the Turkey article for example. One could argue that there is no primary topic - because the usage of the term is similarly weighted between country and the bird. (And at certain times of the year in particular, users visiting Wikipedia are probably looking for the bird related article). However, the "longer-term significance" of Turkey (the country) is proven by the fact that the name of the bird is derived from the name of the country. Hence Turkey (the country) "trumps" turkey (the bird) under primary topic guidelines. The same is true here. Guliolopez (talk) 01:21, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Why would anyone expect Google results for "limerick +'city' -'poem'" and especially "limerick +'poem' -'city'" to give meaningful results for the primacy question here? I mean, while references to the city of Limerick are likely to use the word "city" and not the word "poem", I suggest references to the poetic use of "limerick" are unlikely to use the word "poem", so requiring its inclusion is unwarranted. Indeed, "limerick -city" produces 41 million hits [2], while "limerick +city" produces only 28 million hits [3].

    On top of that, we have the page view stats I outlined in my Support post below, which also clearly show that the city is not the primary use, despite it occupying the base name title.

    As to long-term significance, it's not that strong of a case, and that's really only a tie-breaker in cases where the usage case is borderline. --B2C 19:59, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

  • While I agree with most everything B2C says here, I don't agree that long-term significance is "really only a tie-breaker in cases where the usage case is borderline". There are a number of cases where the community of editors has clearly indicated that one topic is primary, regardless of page traffic. For example, most everyone I know would think of the Led Zep musician on hearing the name John Paul Jones, but primary topic doesn't always follow traffic. More often (and rightly so IMO), long-term significance is used to place a disambiguation page at a base name in cases where there may be a popular topic with greater page traffic. For example Madonna is a disambiguation page even though the page traffic for the entertainer trounces that of any of the other pages. older ≠ wiser 20:25, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose per User:Guliolopez's qualitative arguments above, particularly the Turkey comparison. And I agree with User:Peter James that, if the article is moved, it should be to Limerick (city). This was the suggested target of a previous request above. —  AjaxSmack  01:45, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Honestly I do not care if the poem or the city gets this title, but one of them obviously should. For what it is worth, Limerick (poetry) gets twice as many page views as Limerick. Apteva (talk) 06:04, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose per User:Guliolopez. Laurel Lodged (talk) 11:53, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Guliolopez. Snappy (talk) 13:34, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose Limerick City is the primary topic. Requesting a page move after it is done gives me a strange feeling regarding to AGF. The Banner talk 14:16, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
    • I think nominator is also victim of his own point of view, in the most literal way (no nasty meanings intended). Indeed, for someone living in the USA Limerick is just a big village. The focus on the number of inhabitants proves that point. From the Irish point of view, it is the third biggest city in the country. From my personal Dutch POV, it is one of the most famous cities in Ireland. The Banner talk 19:00, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Guliolopez + The Banner. Finnegas (talk) 17:17, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The poetic form dates only from modern(ish) times, and its name is (probably) derived from the city which is a whole lot more ancient. --A bit iffy (talk) 17:48, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Giuliolopez's summary of the position. And why is the nominator changing Limerick to Limerick (Ireland)? Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:00, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Firstly, if the city article is moved, it should be to Limerick (city), as noted by others. Secondly, without meaning any insult to anyone, the poetic form probably is the primary usage everywhere outside of Ireland. so Limerick should have the article on that topic in preference to a disambiguation page. 168.12.253.66 (talk) 18:56, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose: Limerick, and the original Luimneach, were around for centuries before the poetic form, which along with places named after the city belong in the DAB page. Brocach (talk) 19:20, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose: There was once an editor named RedSlash,
Whose move was made in a flash,
You might think I'd say;
Oppose his rename all the way,
'Cause his dab became contagious like a bad rash.
Oh dear, oh dear! Wrong Limerick. ww2censor (talk) 20:54, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Support; age does not determine primacy, else Boston would go to the town in Lincolnshire. Regardless, this proposal does not suggest that the poetic style, or any other topic, is primary over the city, merely that the city is not overwhelmingly likely to be the meaning sought when a reader looks for that term. I don't think anyone has shown otherwise. Powers T 18:17, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Support As I type this, I have not yet preceded it with support or oppose. I am checking page view stats first. For the city, we have 33,173 views in March, 2013. That's pretty high. What about the poetic usage? Hmm. 66,236 views in March. We can debate on whether the poetry usage is primary, but there should be no question about the city - it clearly is not the primary topic. So I must support, and am adding that accordingly. --B2C 19:43, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. The page traffic is strong suggestion there is no primary topic. older ≠ wiser 20:25, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
    • Actually, page traffic supports Limerick (poetry) as the primary topic. Apteva (talk) 04:45, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
      • No. Your presumption that there is a primary topic for this ambiguous term is nonsense. And the page views on these two more important articles differ by not even a factor of two. Dicklyon (talk) 06:28, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Proponents for two different topics for primary, WP:PRIMARYTOPIC criteria on readership usage shows no primary, and no problem with long-term significance. -- JHunterJ (talk) 20:52, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Support – A PrimaryTopic claim on a term this ambiguous is not supportable. Dicklyon (talk) 02:24, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Support, as a guy who spent nearly half his life not realizes that such a town even existed. It was always a poem for me until I was about 17. Clearly no primary topic here. However, reformat suggested title as Limerick, Ireland, the typical formatting for place names. Ego White Tray (talk) 03:08, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
That is the format used for US towns, but not those in Ireland. See List of populated places in the Republic of Ireland and List of towns and villages in Northern Ireland. Apteva (talk) 04:45, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Good point. Limerick, Ireland seems better than the other proposals. The key thing is to get rid of the bogus PrimaryTopic claim. Dicklyon (talk) 03:13, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Guliolopez. The city is the primary topic based on usage and long-term significance. Older≠wiser's John Paul Jones analogy is particularly apt. Also, "City, State" is not the standard format for Irish place names. Scolaire (talk) 08:13, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
    • Guliolopez' argument was refuted. The John Paul Jones example is not apt because while the long-term significance of John Paul Jones and Limerick are comparable, the long-term significance of the alternatives, John Paul Jones (musician) and Limerick (poetry), are not. That's why we have a primary topic per long-term significance in the JPJ case, but no primary topic in the Limerick case. --B2C 18:26, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment: One of the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC criteria is number of incoming links. Limerick (poetry) has about 130 Mainspace links, Limerick has many hundreds. Brocach (talk)
To be more precise, Limerick (poetry) has about 130 Mainspace links, Limerick has over 2,000. Brocach (talk) 21:05, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
This argument doesn't work that well for apples and oranges, like poems and cities. It is normal that Limerick the city would have many more incoming links because things happen in a city, and are thusly linked. If we were comparing two cities, then number of incoming links would be a determinant, but in this case, since arguably there are more articles about things that happened in Ireland than there are articles about poetry, it is not a fair comparison.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 22:04, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
    • Indeed. When one criterion indicates a different result from others, that suggests there is no primary topic. --B2C 18:26, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
      • Actually what we say in that case is to hash it out amongst ourselves. "In a few cases, there is some conflict between a topic of primary usage and one of primary long-term significance. In such a case, consensus determines which article, if either, is the primary topic." (feel free to correct the grammar in that sentence) Apteva (talk) 19:37, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
        • Yeah, that "guidance" is worse than useless; it's an open invitation for JDLI arguments. Case in point. --B2C 23:11, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Guliolopez and The Banner. Hamish59 (talk) 11:03, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Support, however Limerick (city) would be better and seems to follow the standard of the tree. Guidolopez' search argument is flawed, as many articles about limerick (poem) may not use the word poem. There is clearly no primary topic here, and since different users may come with different perceptions, landing on a DAB page is probably the best solution. I do note however that this will require updates to thousands of articles as a result of this move - can that be done as an automated process? --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 22:04, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Support The city came first. That doesn't make it more significant or more likely to be the topic being sought by readers. Theoldsparkle (talk) 14:03, 25 April 2013 (UTC) (I have no opinion on the best new title for the city article.) Theoldsparkle (talk) 12:50, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Light Support No one has show that Limerick the city is primary topic via reliable sources stats. Linguistic limericks is certainly a strong competing search term. The only thing stopping me from placing a full support is a general dislike of disambiguation pages; If guided strickly by convention and policy it would be a full support. The Turkey argument is somewhat ridiculous on two basses; one the supremacy of country as primary topic (animal vs country) has never been brought through as a requested move (only Republic of Turkey vs the common name Turkey), secondly WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. I also observe that a fair number of those who opposed a active in the Irish topic area; I do question the level of objectivity in some of the opposition above given they cite either the argument of another individual or personal opinion. Either show stats demonstrating primary topic amongst reliable sources or move.--Labattblueboy (talk) 23:25, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Support There's no longer primacy of the city. Most sixth graders will know what a limerick is, considerably fewer in number would know where Limerick is. The world changes, and we shouldn't need to stick to obsolete notions, or argue that the town should come first because it came first historically. -- Ohconfucius ping / poke 06:19, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
    • In your country, half the world away, perhaps. The Banner talk 12:26, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I think the town still has primacy here. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:40, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose per Guliolopez's rationale; but if the city is to be renamed, it should be to Limerick (city), per Cork (city). The long-term significance of the city is a relevant factor here, because it gives the city a promienence in the many sources which are not indexed online and do not show up in Google searches. However, my opposition s weakened a bit by the page view stats, which show twice as many hits for Limerick (poetry) as for Limerick (e.g. Jan 2013: Limerick=29253, but Limerick (poetry)=55973).
    The reason that those stats don't swing me to support the move is that they reflect a wider systemic bias towards popular culture, which I believe a serious encyclopedia should be wary of. Additionally, there are only 458 pages link to Limerick (poetry), whereas 2692 pages link to the city. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:10, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
    • As a serious encyclopedia, I would think that the type of poetry is the more scholarly topic, when you remove regional ties. It certainly is taught in grammar school/grade school/elementary school/primary school, while the city is not. Also how many hits for the city would be eliminated if it didn't occupy the undisambiguated position, for those who need to go through it for the type of poetry? -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 02:09, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
        • For sure that depends on your location. I did not get the poetry-Limerick in primary school but I did get the geography-Limerick there. And to make it clear: my primary school resided in The Netherlands. The Banner talk 15:59, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
      • There likely would be very little difference. Most people get to articles by clicking on a link, and search gives article suggestions that let you pick the article you want. Apteva (talk) 05:57, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
    • Your oppose would make more sense if we were talking about making the poetry primary. Since you acknowledge that there are arguments in favor of both for primacy, then the proposed solution -- move the disambiguation page to the base name -- would seem to be called for. Powers T 13:24, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment As others have indicated above, "Limerick (city)" would be better than "Limerick, Ireland" if the article is to be moved.--A bit iffy (talk) 04:13, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose, WP:PRIMARYTOPIC particularly when considered from a perspective of National varieties of English. Also Limerick is a very important town in the history of Ireland, and so is the primary topic from a historical perspective on both sides of the Irish Channel (which almost certainly makes it the primary topic in the UK as well as Ireland). In sport Limerick City is one of the heartlands of Rugby Union and so well known for followers of that sport (comare for example this Google search and this one in the NZ domain. BTW given the rivalry between the citizens of Cork and Limerick, I would expect people who reside in Cork to be in favour of this move, for reasons other than those mentioned so far, and of course to the Jackeens they are both country villages inhabited by nice well mannered country people :-) -- PBS (talk) 10:01, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Wikipedia article traffic statistics

Limerick (poetry) has been viewed 92,540 times in the last 90 days.

Limerick (city) has been viewed 61,468 times in the last 90 days.

Clearly the city is more important, so it deserves the Limerick title. Thank you Irish jingoists. Th4n3r (talk) 17:26, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Your frustration is understandable, but this was already discussed directly above in the "Requested Move 2013" section. Yes, the poetic genre has more pageviews. But that's only one of the three suggested determinants of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Another is incoming wikilinks: the city has 2500+; the poetic genre only 400+. No one seems to have been able to gauge the third (usage in reliable sources) yet. So it's a wash, except that the ratio of wikilinks in favor of the city (roughly 5:1) is far more impressive than the ratio of pageviews in favor of the poetic genre (roughly 3:2).
The two "major aspects" of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC are "usage" (again, hard to gauge, since "limerick + city -poem" isn't exactly analagous to "limerick +poem -city", since poetic limericks are often published without the word "poem" anywhere nearby, so the measure unfairly advantages the city) and "long-term significance," on which the city has a head start of many centuries, and the future of which (will future people care more about short ribald poems or small Irish cities?) is beyond our ken. So again, one measure is a wash, and the other favors the city as the primary topic.
As for "Irish jingoists," well, I doubt many Wikipedians bother to watch the city's article (and talk page) other than those like myself with an interest in Irish topics, so that's who is more likely to comment on the "city vs. poem vs. disambiguation page" article-naming debate when it's discussed here. Rinne na dTrosc (talk) 18:47, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Feud

Does the Limerick Feud warrant a separate section? It is mentioned in the Culture section in passing - completely without explanation. TheWarOfArt (talk) 22:13, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't think we improve this article by linking to such a bad article as Limerick feud (despite your efforts, sorry) The Banner talk 23:19, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
I don't know about a separate section (since that seems like WP:UNDUE), but it seems to me that the Keane-Collopy/McCarthy-Dundon feud is notable (based on news coverage, e.g.), and merits further discussion in this article than just a passing mention. As for the Limerick feud article, I think it's a fine start, myself. Rinne na dTrosc (talk) 04:01, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
It's a good article, a very notable subject, objections are based on Wikipedia:IDONTLIKEIT aren't they?78.19.230.11 (talk) 13:36, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Whether it merits a separate section or not, It should at least be linked. The condition of the Limerick Feud page, (which I am fixing) shouldn't rule that out.TheWarOfArt (talk) 15:19, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
In my case the only part of Wikipedia:IDONTLIKEIT applicable is towards the feud itself. The Gardai and the Courts should get the means to stop it. The article Limerick feud could do with a a load of improvements but their is no need to hide this ugly feud. The Banner talk 16:09, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Cycling

Disappointed to have my Cycling addition removed (twice) as “blatant promo and advertising”. Other community bicycle programs appear in Wikipedia, some even have their own pages (see Vélib', dublinbikes and Barclays Cycle Hire, there is even a Category:Community bicycle programs. Life is too short to try a third time, anyone feel like editing the following in a way that permits this noteworthy addition to the cityscape be mentioned?

My latest edit read:

In December 2014 a public bicycle rental scheme was launched in central Limerick. Initially 23 locations will be provided with 215 bicycles. the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport, the National Transport Authority and the city of Limerick have awarded the contract to Rothar Nua. Coca Cola Ireland will invest in the scheme and in return it will be branded “Coca Cola Zero Bikes”. references I included

http://www.businessandleadership.com/sustainability/item/48701-coca-cola-zero-bikes-offici

http://www.limerickleader.ie/news/business/business-news/public-bike-scheme-wheeled-out-in-limerick-city-1-6462061

http://www.limerickpost.ie/2014/11/11/coca-cola-zero-bikes-coming-to-limerick/

Belmonter (talk) 16:25, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

____________________________________________________________________________________________

Thanks for your attempt to highlight the bike share scheme, disappointed that there was no discussion before deleting the original article and a subsequent attempt to include the public bicycle rental scheme on the Limerick page (as has an attempt on the Galway page) I would propose adding an article based on the section on the "Cork (city)" page as, despite an editor categorising the scheme as advertising, I believe that the scheme is noteworthy and advertising is not the schemes reason for being. The scheme has had a lot of public money spent on it and is not set up to provide a revenue flow to the (admittedly unpopular to some) sponsor. Many other public bicycle rental schemes are included in Wikipedia, with several having their own pages, including some with the sponsors name included in the title, the London scheme is sponsored by a bank (surely there can be no less popular classification of business). There is even a category “Community bicycle programs” on Wikipedia. What is the feeling out there in Wiki land? Is this worth including on the Limerick page? The text, with references, I would propose is as follows: “In 2014, a public bicycle rental scheme was launched. The scheme is operated by An Rothar Nua on behalf of the National Transport Authority, with funding supplemented by an advertising sponsor.[1]” Regards Johnny — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.153.248.8 (talk) 22:10, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Limerick. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:40, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Population of Limerick

The info box on Limerick states that the population of the City is 95 854 persons according to the 2011 Census. When you look at the tables in the census, however,you find the number of 57 106 persons. 95 854 seems to be closer to the number of females in the entire county, incl. the City. Which number is correct for the population of Limerick City  ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Polle dublin (talk • contribs) 12:11, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Limerick. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:51, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Limerick. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:16, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Limerick. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:41, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Limerick. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:13, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Limerick. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:30, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Bridges of Limerick

Could someone double check for me if the Limerick bridges are correctly named, located and described here: List of crossings of the Shannon#Crossings It went 2.5 years without Sarsfield BridgeBogger (talk) 22:21, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

  1. ^ http://www.galwaycity.ie/news/131/59/The-Coca-Cola-Zero-Bikes-are-Coming-to-Galway-Cork-and-Limerick-Launch-Dates-Announced/
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Limerick/Archive_2&oldid=1136908210"