Talk:Foras Feasa ar Éirinn

Primary source
I'm glad this article has been created, but at the moment it relies entirely on a primary source, i.e. the work itself. Reliable secondary sources are needed to improve it. I'll see what I can dig out when I'm at home. I've corrected one important error in the opening. Foras Feasa is not a "manuscript". It's a literary/historical work, copies of which are found in numerous manuscripts. --Nicknack009 (talk) 14:08, 17 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks NickNack, thanks for the help. I did my best to give a brief description of the book, I know its not great. But at least this page is a start and we can improve the article and add to it over the coming months and years. In effect, FFE tells exactly the same story as LGE. So I don't know if there is any point in expanding the article to the same extent as the Lebor Gabála Érenn article. If I get time over the coming months, I would like to add a complete index of all the individual texts that are up on the UCC CELT website. So in theory, you could come to this Wikipedia FFE page and very quickly find the specific part of FFE that discusses any of the characters and people in the story. But its time consuming to do it, and I have a tonne of other stuff that I am currently preparing to do with the genealogy in the story. See how it goes. John37309 (talk) 16:16, 17 September 2015 (UTC)


 * NickNack, I see you did a full rewrite of the article, well done! You use the same writing style on all your articles. You place more importance on secondary and tertiary sources than the original primary text. I guess you haven't yet figured out what these books are. If you knew what these books really were, I bet you would write your articles differently. These books are not "history" books, they were written by "Men of God", and to decode them, you have to think like a "Man of God", you have to think like a "Scientist", not a 20th century academic. Only then will you figure out what the books are :) John37309 (talk) 02:20, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Keating identified in article by religion and nationality. So now too Cox. Either everyone is so identified, or no-one.
Hello There,

I've identified Cox by way of nationality and religion in the same manner Keating was so described and identified. Kind Regards, M. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PfPorlock (talk • contribs) 10:35, 13 August 2019 (UTC)