Talk:Cumann na nGaedheal

Untitled
I think that considering this party's key role in the foundation of the Irish Free State, this article requires expansion. It formed the first Government of an independent Ireland, provoked controversy and was the predecessor of the Fine Gael party. Could people agree to get together in an attempt to expand this article and attempt to define the ideology and achievements of Cumann na nGheadheal?

I think this article should include reference to crises under Cumann na nGaedhael including the Boundary Crisis of 1925, when the Boundary Commission's proposals on redrawing the North-South border were leaked by a Unionist (J.R. Fisher) on the Commission which would have required the South to hand over a rich part of East Donegal containing 7,000 Protestants to Northern Ireland, while the South would only get a few boglands in Armagh and Fermanagh. Cumann na nGaedhael naturally refused to accept losing territory so he went to London and negotiated the scrapping of the report and also the scrapping of the Council of Ireland (an All-Ireland body in the Anglo-Irish Treaty 1921). As a result, the electorate punished CnG in the 1927 election, though with FF abstaining, CnG continued to govern, until FF entered the Dail and together with Labour voted the government out, before it was re-elected later in 1927.

Daily, I've tried to improve this page but think it needs a little more work.

I note that this page is not easily accessible by typing "Cumann na nGaedheal into the Wikisearch, and actually comes up as about the tenth choice on a list (with a relevence of about 1.5%. Since this is the spelling most commonly used in historical texts (from what I have seen), perhaps it would be possible for both spellings to link directly to this page?

name transcription
You might not want to go as far as I have done here, but I dont think your version is spefic enough (of makes no distinction between lensis and fortis sounds -the 'nn' in cumann is longer than the l at the end of 'gael'). Traditionally, a rule of thumb is that a long vowel has a short l, n, or r after it, and in opposition, a short vowel has a long l, n, or r

POV
this article really violates the whole no point of view thing, it basically says how great cummann na gaedhal were, like the stuff about wt cosgrave, the article come across as if it belongs on a pro fine gael/pro treaty fansite, rather then an encyclopedia, i really think this needs to be re written to show the party from every concievable side —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.239.169.143 (talk) 16:50, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Original Cumann na nGaedhael
I would suggest that the information in this section is wrong. From my reading of it they were not founded to campaign against a visit by King Edward VII and Queen Alexandra to Ireland. From what I read it was formed to bring together a number of other parties to form an executive body to coordinate their efforts. I would like to add to this section, but would like this addressed first. --Domer48 (talk) 20:47, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I fixed the Griffith set up the National Council as an ard hoc body to protest against the royal visit.--Padraig (talk) 23:11, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

State Building and reconstruction
This section is nothing but uncritical POV on the Government of which CnG was the main party. Phrases like "The party's Minister for Home Affairs"demonstrate a poorly understood distinction between the party and the government.(Not an uncommon error in party politics) Major re-write needed to avoid the bin.RashersTierney (talk) 17:39, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Sources for the spelling of the name
Footnote 1 reads: "Different sources give different spellings of the name. The Department of the Taoiseach, the Fine Gael website, History Ireland and academic studies generally use ae rather than ea as the original spelling." The Department of the Taoiseach website (which has no official or legal standing) does use ae; the Fine Gael website uses ea; and a search of History Ireland on Jstor turned up 5 articles using ae (of which one actually used both spellings) and 21 using ea. Perhaps it's time to take a fresh look at that footnote? Scolaire (talk) 13:56, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I had assumed that both the article title and the footnote were the result of some discussion - at least via edit summaries - but checking the history I see that both were done in a single edit without any discussion in December 2005. I propose to move the article and remove the footnote unless somebody gives me a compelling reason not to. Scolaire (talk) 08:45, 29 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Done. Scolaire (talk) 20:24, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Leadership of Michael Collins?
If Collins died on August 22 1922, then how can a party which wasn't founded until 27 April 1923 have had a leadership which included Michael Collins? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.255.225.104 (talk) 13:42, 3 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Good question! I've fixed it. --Scolaire (talk) 13:56, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

That's better! Cosgrave was a mean little man and it's now clearer that his personality, not Collins's, is what moulded the party. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.255.225.104 (talk) 20:12, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://irishhistorypodcast.ie/1925-irelands-forgotten-famine/. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and according to fair use may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Sideways713 (talk) 11:41, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Stop breaking the template
Please stop breaking the template. It doesn't cater for the Irish Free State, so leave in the Republic of Ireland. Snappy (talk) 17:41, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I've no idea what you're on about. I checked the template in my version and it was fine. Please stop edit-warring. Gob Lofa (talk) 17:52, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Please stop edit-warring. Please stop breaking the template. It removes the bottom lines. Snappy (talk) 18:12, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Now I see it, that's fair enough. But it's no excuse for your edit-warring. Consider this a caution. Gob Lofa (talk) 18:38, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you for stopping your edit-warring, please do not do it again! Snappy (talk) 18:43, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Your lack of contrition doesn't bode well, I'm afraid. Gob Lofa (talk) 18:53, 14 November 2015 (UTC)