Talk:Cornwallis in Ireland

Catholic and Protestant Camps
Lecky is a fine historian but his studies are 120 years old. Therefore the charge that the United Irishmen split into Catholic and Protestant camps simply doesn't reflect what happened. There was a very real division between moderates and radicals though, but Catholics were interspersed between these (McCormick and Thomas Addis Emmett, for example, were moderates) In short Lecky was wrong. Read Bartlett, Dunne and even Pakenham (1969) to get the modern scholarly response. 86.40.207.97 (talk) 20:54, 21 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm actually aware that there are shortcomings in the scholarship on this article, and will revisit much of what the older sources say the next time I pick this article up to work on. Please provide titles, ISBNs, or other more detailed catalog information for the works you suggest; I am not widely read in Irish history.  Magic ♪piano 21:21, 21 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Did you write the article? For someone not widely read in Irish history you've done a fine job. Lecky is a good historian but he is quite dated, and was also rather critical of the manner in which the Act of Union was passed (Despite being a Liberal Unionist)


 * Here are a few suggestions; Thomas Bartlett, The Fall and Rise of the Irish Nation (It has a good chapter on the 1798-1801 period), Thomas Pakenham, The Year of Liberty, rather old (1969) but the authoritative history of the rebellion, Patrick Geoghegan, The Irish Act of Union, a study in high politics (Authoritative account of the Act of Union, Cornwallis in Ireland, and the resignation of William Pitt) Also a collection of essays, The Act of Union, Bicentenary perspectives. Happy hunting. 86.40.207.97 (talk) 17:39, 22 April 2010 (UTC) P.S- G.C. Bolton wrote a book on the Act of Union also, worth a look.


 * I did indeed do most of the work on this. I'm working on improving Wikipedia's coverage of Cornwallis, which this article is a dent in.  Thanks for your source recommendations.  Magic ♪piano 00:03, 24 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Just for explanation: I reversed the deletions of the anonymous IP talk because the deletions were unsourced and unexplained. There was no indication to me at the time that any explanation was provided, other than the tag "references removed". I disagree with the removal of this reference, but am not going to get into an edit war on this matter. Hohenloh + 15:29, 26 April 2010 (UTC)


 * That's exactly what I figured. I have no specific reason to either accept or dispute the editor's claim, but I'm also cognizant of the limitations of the source he's arguing against.  Magic ♪piano 16:58, 26 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Oh this guy just takes the biscuit. He clearly doesn't understand what he's talking about, he refuses to respond to my comments, yet demands 'civility', whilst simultaneously treating me as little better than a dog. If I thought he even resembled a gentleman, I'd challenge him to a duel for the gross calumnities he's presented against me. He's impervious to reason. I am seriously pissed off at this stage. Such cheek. 86.40.210.11 (talk) 20:57, 29 April 2010 (UTC)


 * As mentioned elsewhere, you can always resort to WP:ANI if you have issues with another editor.  Magic ♪piano 21:58, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Catholic Emancipation
I am reluctant to edit but wonder if editors more familiar with this page might want to address the question of Catholic Emancipation in the lede -'basic human rights' is a rather anachronistic phrasing. As editors will know, the outstanding issue by the time of the passing of the Act of Union was the question of Catholics becoming MPs - 'basic human rights' might be confusing to the reader.86.44.145.133 (talk) 15:47, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * According to Roman Catholic Relief Bills and some other sources, what you say is not exactly true. The MP issue may have been a major one, but my reading of summaries of the bills preceding the union is that certain rights we might consider "basic", like freedom of association, had only been incompletely granted by the time of union.  It is certainly true that suffrage had been greatly expanded by then, as had a significant degree of freedom of conscience (i.e. worship) and the right to engage in previously-prohibited professions.  However, Catholics still did not have voting rights outside Ireland, which was fixed in the 1829 bill.  Magic ♪piano 17:40, 16 February 2011 (UTC)