Talk:Peep o' Day Boys

Catholic repair funds
It is not according to Ruth Dudley Edwards that Orangemen donated money to Catholic repair funds. It is on record and was also reported by Col. R.H. Wallace a hundred years previously to Edwards. I've put in both refs and am going to remove the according to RDR bit.--Corvus cornix 1958 (talk) 15:18, 18 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Please provide quotes from the sources to support this suggestion.-- Domer48 'fenian'  16:54, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Correct attribution
Since both William Blacker, Robert Hugh Wallace are authors of The formation of the Orange Order, 1795-1798 published by the Education Committee of the Grand Orange Lodge of Ireland, for correct attribution we need to know which one said what. At the moment we are using Wallace because of the misleading reference since corrected, but we need now the correct attribution.-- Domer48 'fenian'  16:52, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Protestant and Presbyterian
'both Protestant and Presbyterian brethren' is unclear. Since http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant states that Presbyterians are Protestants, it also seems inaccurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.127.24.34 (talk) 12:16, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Battle of the Diamond
In relation to the article 'Peep o'Day Boys' and in the subsection 'Battle of the Diamond' it seems there is a biased historical view point against the Peep o'Day Boys and in favour of the Catholic Defenders. In keeping with the Wikipedia neutral point of view policy (NPOV) I suggest this article is also given a historical view point which comes from Protestant (Peep o'Days Boys) side of the battle. This will help even up the neutrality of this article.


 * The whole article has a POV slant. I've started work on neutralising the article. Mabuska (talk) 11:56, 22 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I've for most intents and purposes completed the editing of the article. Quite complicated as various sources at times kind of contradict, but I've managed to get out as unbiased an output as I could. I've one or two more sources to plow over, but until then, article I think no longer has NPOV issues and I have removed the tag and added a rating. Mabuska (talk) 13:58, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Page needs work
with particular regards to the linen trade section Jondvdsn1 (talk) 13:13, 7 April 2023 (UTC)