Talk:Youghal

Edit warring over recent economic history in the lead

While checking Recent Changes tonight I noticed a pattern of edits and reverts to this article. The problem appears to be that someone (currently editing from 109.76.148.204) does not want the article to mention Youghal's severe long-term economic decline. Perhaps this reflects a concern that if Youghal's problems are publicized it will be harder to solve them. That might be true and it is certainly an understandable concern. I've re-cast the economic analysis so that it is specifically supported by reliable sources but AFAICS there's no doubt that the town has been blighted by the effects of globalisation and to some extent poor decisions by local and central government. However uncomfortable this may feel, it is not Wikipedia's job to censor these facts. Please bear in mind that the three-revert rule may apply in the event of persistent edit-warring. - Pointillist (talk) 22:25, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Edit warring

I've semi-protected this article for one week on the version it was on when I saw the problem, without prejudice as to which version is better.

You guys need to read Wikipedia:Edit warring and discuss your disagreements here before making any more edits to the article. You should also read the first three paragraphs of WP:LEAD and jointly work to rewrite the article's lead section appropriately.

If asked, my opinion would be that some detail of the recent decline of the town needs to be in the article, because there are good references for it, but it should not all be in the lead. I'll be watching on and off over the next few days—if you want any help from an admin, just ask.  —SMALLJIM  22:32, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Smalljim. Speaking as another outsider, if asked I'd suggest that rather than trying to suppress the brief detail about the decline since the mid-1990s, Youghal's supporters should apply their admirable energy to getting the press to present the town as a success story in the making. If reliable secondary sources say that Youghal is overcoming its decline, attracting investment, developing its heritage sites, becoming a top tourist destination, etc., then Wikipedia will say the same. With that mixture we could then re-balance the article so that the decline and rise are briefly mentioned in the lead and then developed in a section of their own. - Pointillist (talk) 23:09, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Spot on. My attempt at protection wasn't very successful, so I've removed it and rewritten the article somewhat to put the details of the decline into its own section. May I remind editors here about our rules on edit warring. I believe conflict of interest is an important factor to consider too.  —SMALLJIM  12:51, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Point taken on edit warring and my apologies. I would like to say I left in the negatives on the economic decline once they were properly referenced and not merely someone's opinion. The page history will verify that. I've no objection to 'negative' references per se....but 'positive' references were being removed for no good reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hyde09 (talk • contribs) 16:51, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for engaging here, Hyde09 – Talk page interaction is always appreciated. It's also very helpful when editors use edit summaries to make their intentions clear as you've been doing recently. Happy editing. - Pointillist (talk) 20:13, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Youghal. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090326015646/http://www.cso.ie/census/documents/census2006_Table_7_and_12.pdf to http://www.cso.ie/census/documents/census2006_Table_7_and_12.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:37, 2 July 2016 (UTC)