Talk:Kingdom of Dublin

Why not Kingdom of Dublin?
Why is this article not titled Kingdom of Dublin instead of Kings of Dublin? It reads as an article about a kingdom, and the title in the infobox says Kingdom. I got here through a link from an article that refers to it as the Kingdom of Dublin.--Jim10701 (talk) 23:47, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree with you. The article should be renamed. -- Nidator T / C 08:37, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree also. The move has been completed. BodvarBjarki (talk) 11:59, 15 February 2010 (UTC)


 * But why The Kingdom of Dublin? By analogy with Republic of Ireland etc. this article should be titled 'Kingdom of Dublin' as suggested by Jim and Nidator. Any objections if I move? --Yumegusa (talk) 15:57, 1 March 2010 (UTC)


 * An admin will have to move it, because Kingdom of Dublin has been edited before and it won't let you delete "The" from the start (I just tried). But I agree with your position. - Yorkshirian (talk)


 * I don't see where the consensus was for the move to "The Kingdom of Dublin", which looks silly in English. I have moved it to Dublin (kingdom) for now. DinDraithou (talk) 01:47, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, let's get an admin to move it to Kingdom of Dublin, seems that's where we all would rather have this article. Finn Rindahl (talk) 12:33, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Sitric (941-943)
There is a Sitric, linked to a dab page, in the middle of Blacaire's kingship i.e. 941-943. There is no explanation offered. We need a citation, I think. 134.226.252.155 (talk) 14:07, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Chronology
Can anyone offer a reliable source for the chronology of kings given here? Downham certainly gives a different succession. Retroplum (talk) 23:37, 23 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I don't know where the dates come from. I'm not that familiar with the early kings, but the chronology of the later ones really bug me. The list is missing a few twelfth-century figures. Some of the dates here don't any make sense, and I wonder if they are derived from a somewhat dated book or website. Maybe it'd be better to scrap the date column and make use of the 'notes' to identify the known rise/fall/events/relations/factoid/whatever of each individual. I wouldn't recommend anyone automatically use the dates to construct an article at least.--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 23:35, 24 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Yep, I'm trying to fill in those kings who don't currently have articles and the information given here is rather unhelpful. I will probably try to do something similar to what you suggest at some point in the future, although anyone else who is willing is certainly welcome to give it go. Retroplum (talk) 15:20, 26 November 2014 (UTC)