User talk:RashersTierney/Archive 3

Peter Tyrrell
I've started an article on the late Peter Tyrrell who was in Letterfrack. Let me know how it can be improved. Autarch (talk) 20:28, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * It will probably be tomorrow, but happy to help in any way I can. RashersTierney (talk) 22:05, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * One thing I can't remember seeing is any mention of where Peter Tyrrell was buried. No mention of what kind of grave either or even whether he was cremated and his ashes scattered in a communal site. I'll keep an eye out for any mention of his burial. It's almost as if Thanks for your kind words on my work - it's the least I can do for him. One person who might know is Dr. Diarmuid Whelan of UCCs History department - he publicised the fact that Peter Tyrrell was Noah Kitterick here - I think he also edited Peters memoir. Autarch (talk) 18:02, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I haven't read his memoir, but do you know the first names of his parents? There is a family of the name in the area he was born in listed here in the 1911 census, but that probably breaches WP:OR. Autarch (talk) 22:25, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll ask about getting the book through inter-library loan (you might do the same - it usually only takes a few days, and doesn't cost anything). There is likely to be considerable family sensitivity - best to take a cautious approach re genealogy. Regards. RashersTierney (talk) 23:05, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Hammered!
 

Rashers Tierney A no-nonsense award for vigilance on Chav pablo hablo. 13:36, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Most kind Pablomismo, many thanks. RashersTierney (talk) 16:59, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Irish Poor Laws
No not at all but I'm not quite sure what part of the article amounts to analysis? Remove whatever you wish as I was planning to give the article a copyedit once it had been expanded to a decent size. Thank you for pointing out I should be using IFS between 1922-1937. I'm not a fan of people who get there British Isles terminology wrong and I think I've been a little guilty of it myself. (Please don't be one of those people offended by the term British Isles itself!) Francium12 (talk) 11:51, 25 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi Francium, and well done on your efforts on the article. My reservations re. Ask About Ireland particularly, but not exclusively, is that much of the material amounts to analysis expressing a P(oint) O(f) V(iew). The statement in the lead, "Over time the Irish Poor Law system developed from being a safety net for the poor to an early public health service." in many ways exemplifies my concerns. If the Irish Poor Laws were in fact a safety-net, then it was one so full of holes as not to be fit for purpose. However, it was never intended to be such. Its purpose was as a mechanism to sort the 'deserving' from the 'undeserving' poor, and assumed that the 'deserving' poor amounted to 1% of the population rather than the 25% regularly in a state of destitution. You are at least entitled to a heads up on my intention to reduce as much as possible the more egregious POV, and please don't see it as a criticism of your excellent efforts. On the question of British Isles, I think you can safely assume that we have quite different political perspectives, but that should not prevent us from working together to try to get this on the way to GA status. Regards. RashersTierney (talk) 10:00, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

This is the offending image File:Hull1.jpg. Tell me if that copyedit of workhouse ever goes ahead. It's in a bit of a state isn't it? Francium12 (talk) 11:23, 31 July 2009 (UTC)


 * You may or may not be aware that the original plate appears to be from new and complete history of the town and county of the town of Kingston-upon-Hull'', if I understand the referencing from this other publication correctly; scroll down to 'Plates and Pedigrees' #4.. A great pity the researcher concerned is not prepared to make his efforts available to Wikipedia. Regarding Workhouse, we probably need to revamp the section headings to keep the narrative focused specifically on Workhouses rather than including so many disparate elements of the Poor Laws generally. This info. would be more coherently presented by a 'See also' section with links. The fault lies in the fact that lots of related 'stuff' was put here because the other PL articles were less developed or non existent back then. More will need to be done than c'editing. Regards. RashersTierney (talk) 14:21, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Irish historical statistics

 * again ww2censor (talk) 15:22, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Tubrid
Hi, Coordinates etc - No problem. Sorry I was so rude in taking 5 weeks to reply. Autodidactyl (talk) 12:06, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for getting back, and for the kind offer. Best. RashersTierney (talk) 12:19, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Laurent (talk) 14:01, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

See my page, for response. GoodDay (talk) 23:30, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Four Courts
re your on the Irish Civil War article. You will find different authors blaming either side for the destruction. I haven't Cottrell's book to hand, so I added a ref from Prof Hopkinson's "Green against Green" - regards - ClemMcGann (talk) 12:06, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Apparently the only references to the Public Record Office in Cottrel are here. He does not dispute the laying of mines but raises the question only of whether they were 1) deliberately detonated or 2) exploded due to shelling and fire. The article text certainly does not reflect this. As I recall from BMH Witness Statements, there was no denial on the part of occupying Republicans that mines were set in the PRO. TP Coogan seems convinced that time-delay detonations were deliberate, and he doesn't mince words re. his opinion on that. There was no 'study' as far as I am aware to ascertain exactly how the detonation came about. The more I have read about it, the less doubt I have that it was a deliberate copy-cat action of the Custom House records destruction. RashersTierney (talk) 12:34, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * We will never know, so we have to give both sides, and - as you say - the article does not reflect that balance. I agree that there was no study afaik, but I would not go so far as to say that it was a customs house 'copy cat'. ClemMcGann (talk) 00:57, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I think the evidence (BMH) is building against 'accidental detonation' of carelessly stored ordinance. While some historians continue to cling to this version we need to acknowledge that view. The latter statement is my own POV, not for inclusion in article, but firmly held due to the circumstantial evidence that the Republicans believed that without such records the administration could not function, and a certain wish for a historiographic 'Year One'. RashersTierney (talk) 08:46, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not convinced ClemMcGann (talk) 09:14, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The Ernie O'Malley papers, or memoirs of those with whom he was personally close may yet shed some definitive light. RashersTierney (talk) 09:22, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * we will see (could you visit Dun Laoghaire for an hour or 2 next week end? - need volunteers to collect for the museum - free t-shirt?) ClemMcGann (talk) 14:14, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll certainly consider it and let you know. Already have some intense commitments over the next week which may eat into the weekend. Appreciate the invite, and another T-shirt wouldn't go amiss. RashersTierney (talk) 15:13, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Anytime 11 till 6 - Sat or Sun - at Mariners' Church - ask for me - ClemMcGann (talk) 19:03, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't worry - I'm off to Glencolmcille for a few days. have a look at Irish Mercantile Marine during World War II ClemMcGann (talk) 23:15, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Plenty of advance notice - Remembering those who lost their lives during the Emergency -11.30 am on Sunday 22nd November 2009, mass in City Quay church. Then refreshments in the parochial house. Wreaths will be laid at the Irish Seaman's National Memorial. After a break for lunch while the wreaths are brought out to Dublin Bay and laid on the water, we will reassemble for Evensong at 3.15 pm St. Patrick's Cathedral. ClemMcGann (talk) 15:46, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

A certain user
User:IvanArsitch seems to be a single-purpose account judging by contributions, mostly aimed at The Colm & Jim-Jim Breakfast Show. As the user has reverted edits removing vandalism, I've rolled-back and warned them about it. (Not a fan of the people in the article - in fact I can't stand them, but the edits in question are a clear breach of WP:BLP and WP:NONSENSE.) Autarch (talk) 21:16, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Agree fully with your assessment. I haven't really pushed it for that very reason. RashersTierney (talk) 23:05, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
 * User:AbdulRayman has reverted the page - the edit history of this account is too short to tell if it's the same editor, though it's worth keeping an eye on this account. It may just be another editor who found the vandalism funny. Autarch (talk) 17:44, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * User:Aurtarch has joined in - given the username and comments the editor put on the talk page, it looks like a breach of WP:NPA. I've asked another editor to keep an eye on the article also. Autarch (talk) 17:59, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Autoblocked

 * Thanks for speedy intervention.RashersTierney (talk) 00:42, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the barnstar, it's much appreciated! Also thanks for reverting the miscreants' edit of my talk page. User:DragonflySixtyseven has blocked the culprit and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Autrach another has blocked them again. Autarch (talk) 17:19, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Well deserved. Best. RashersTierney (talk) 22:16, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Ireland Collaboration Project
Holy smokers, if ya'll start resigning your memberships, I'll have to sign up & then take over the Project. Ya'll sure you can trust a Canadian? GoodDay (talk) 15:33, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm inclined to trust this one anyway :-) RashersTierney (talk) 15:44, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you. GoodDay (talk) 15:58, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Wonder if your absence from there was noticed either ;-) RashersTierney (talk) 18:54, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Jumpers, I didn't even noticed myself 'til today. Hmm, I think I'll add my moniker to the Ireland Collaboration Project (while I'm in the mood). GoodDay (talk) 18:59, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * And the very best of luck. RashersTierney (talk) 19:01, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Giggle giggle, thanks. GoodDay (talk) 19:03, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

President of Ireland
With regards to your revert, there is no need to list the full title in both languages the post is commonly known as President of Ireland. Barryob  (Contribs)   (Talk)  20:45, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The title of the office is constitutionally described. It may seem pedantic to you but Uachtarán na hÉireann is not included here as a translation. RashersTierney (talk) 20:54, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * There is no requirement for the constitutional name to be listed just look at the info box for Mary McAleese. Barryob  (Contribs)   (Talk)  21:02, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * With all respect, indicating what might be deficiencies on another article is hardly authoritative. The term Prime Minister, the usual English translation, is not used in place of Taoiseach for that office. RashersTierney (talk) 21:07, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I am unsure what you mean they are both completely different situations the term prime minister is rarely used to describe the Irish head of government in English but this is not the case with the head of state, the President is always referred to as exactly that President.-- Barryob  (Contribs)   (Talk)  21:20, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Re. Taoiseach v "Irish Prime Minister" and common usage, a Google search indicates otherwise; the second title getting more results. What is at issue is formal titles. RashersTierney (talk) 21:41, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Rathduff airfield

 * I'm in Spain, so I can't do much at present, if you get a chance ClemMcGann (talk) 17:18, 20 September 2009 (UTC)


 * There was no mention of any RAF connection with Rathduff in the book ClemMcGann (talk) 02:51, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Oriel House, Westland Row
Saw you were having difficulty with another editor over this article - will keep an eye on it also.Autarch (talk) 19:49, 24 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi, not sure I agree with your edit here on formation of the CID. It seems to me from the source that Collins founded a plain-clothes intelligence unit just after the truce but that the more formal CID was formed later. According to here on August 22, 1922 (same day as Collins' death). Let me know. Jdorney (talk) 18:27, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * While Herlihy is generally meticulous in his research, he has a former policeman's forgiveable tendency to emphasise the legitimacy of the institutions associated with the Garda Siochána. I think in this case OHalpin is closer to 'the facts' and Plauder seems to concurpp211-212, though he puts the beginnings a little later, in August 1921. RashersTierney (talk) 19:42, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Mmm. Good catch on the Plauder source. Is it possible that an informal intelligence group was founded after the truce and a more formal unit after the outbreak of civil war? Jdorney (talk) 20:07, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I think during the truce, it would not have been possible for the 'Provisional Government' to publicly acknowledge any newly formed coercive institutions, but that would not have made them any less necessary in their (specifically Collins') eyes. Even much earlier, the Irish Republic was very slow in accepting responsibility for the early actions of the IRA, as the army of the Republic, in the first days of the war for independence. The IFS would have seen the necessity of a secret police force as a legitimate arm of the State, so by then CID could be put on an official footing. O'Higgins particularly was highly sceptical of the initial cadre, and personnel and other changes occurred due to his influence. I think it would be going too far to say it was a new organisation, though such an interpretation would certainly appeal to some.RashersTierney (talk) 20:28, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Ok, but that more or less backs up what I said, no? It was, apparently, formally launched in August 1922, but informally about a year earlier? Also, would it not have been an IRA unit rather than a National Army one in summer 1921? The treaty, provisional government and National Army (and police: edit) all lay in the future at that point.Jdorney (talk) 20:46, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I'd be very surprised if it wasn't funded directly by Collins from Finance or some other account controlled by him. More IRB than IRA. The lease (who owned the building then?) would make interesting reading. RashersTierney (talk) 20:59, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Soo, do we know when it was founded, and as what? That's the key question.Jdorney (talk) 22:19, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * With all respect, the key questions are who funded it, from when, and why. RashersTierney (talk) 22:48, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Ok, agreed. So, who? Do we know? I'm not going to go changing the article before we know this.Jdorney (talk) 23:19, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * The sources I've given point unequivocally to Collins. RashersTierney (talk) 23:34, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, we know that, but as an IRA unit? when changed to a National Army/police unit? When formally integrated into the Prov govt/Free State?Jdorney (talk) 23:44, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * After Collins was killed, things could be (had to be) put on an official footing. Not surprising that this date is given as the emergence of the 'official' CID. RashersTierney (talk) 00:06, 4 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Aha, there's an interesting point alright. Jdorney (talk) 09:39, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Actually something else from a different article I just noticed. Re the original Irish volunteers, Eoin MacNeill was explicit in acknowledging the legacy of the 18th century vols to his organisation. Did the Ulster Vols acknowledge a similar debt? I wouldn't have thought so, though I admit I could be wrong.Jdorney (talk) 19:17, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll have to get back to you on this one. RashersTierney (talk) 19:42, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I have to admit its difficult to back up my thesis on web searches alone (Try dabbing 'Irish Volunteers' as a search term). We may need to wait for Danny Mansergh to write the book. I think MacNeill's claim owes more to contemporary politics than history. RashersTierney (talk) 21:51, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Don't agree there, I'm surrently reading Charles Townsend's book on the Easter Rising and it's pretty explicit on the subject. For example, (p18) "Denis McCullough and Bulmer Hobson established the Dungannon Clubs in 1905...to celebrate those icons of the constitutionalist movement, the Irish Volunteers of 1782", (p23) in 1911 a dramatic crisis ...would overturn the conventions of nationalist activism andbring that distant icon of the Dungannon clubs, the Volunteer militia, back to life". (p120), direct quote from MacNeill, "the example of the former Volunteers (of 1782) is not that they did not fight but that they did not maintain their organisation till their objects had been secured".


 * No argument that the political impulse came from the UVF but regarding the imagery and symbolism, they do seem to have seen themselves as a re-birth of the original volunteers. Jdorney (talk) 22:19, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree, but on the basis of a revisionist take on the original Volunteers. Take the euphoria of American self-determination (free trade) and the concessions of 1782 out of the equation and the original Volunteers were in the main anti-papist, anti-French, pro-Union and conservative-Whig. RashersTierney (talk) 22:48, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Wouldn't agree with anti-papist though, to my knowledge they were quite progresive on this front, or anti-French, they held Bastille days parades in Belfast after the French revolution of 1789. But regardless, MacNeill and co saw themselves as inheritors of this tradition. So on this basis I'm going to change the article back, using MacNeill's quote. Ok with you? Jdorney (talk) 23:19, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * It needs to be qualified; as you suggested 'saw themselves' or some such. A pity a comprehensive history of the formation of the (latter) Ulster Volunteers has yet to see light.

On support for Bastille Day etc. it was very fleeting, as was the Catholic membership issue, and was why they as an organisation didn't survive the 'French Threat'. If they were as progressive as you seem to think, there would have been no United Irishmen split. RashersTierney (talk) 23:34, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I really don't know to honest. Either way, can I change the bit about MacNeill's Volunteers and assumption of their legacy?Jdorney (talk) 23:44, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Change it, if you can, to reflect our discussion. We can always refine it on the Talk Page. 'Night. RashersTierney (talk) 23:56, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Kelly touches on the 'ambiguous legacy'. I'll include it as a ref. in the article. RashersTierney (talk) 09:58, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Oriel House
Hi, yea you're right. I'm only new to this and no offence intended

Oct 6
Meetup/Ireland

Carriglea Park Industrial School, Dún Laoghaire
There's a start to the article on that place, at least. Autarch (talk) 19:55, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Good start. Could I suggest changing the article name to simply 'Carriglea Park'; it seems sufficiently unambiguous and more likely to work as a search term. Its straightforward but if you are unsure of the mechanics, I can do it. Best. RashersTierney (talk) 20:08, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Done.Autarch (talk) 21:03, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for adding it to the list in the Industrial Schools article.Autarch (talk) 16:46, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
 * No prob. Keep up the good work. RashersTierney (talk) 17:24, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Irish diaspora
Hello, I have a lot of books on Irish emigration. I'd be happy to add the source/reference, but I don't know how. Do you know where I can find a tutorial or something? Regards Olockers (talk) 22:24, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * This tutorial should get you started: Citing sources. If you like you can give me the book/journal title and page number, and I'll do this one as an example. Best. RashersTierney (talk) 22:33, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

reply

 * (Have you edited here before under a different username? For a newbie, you appear unusually confident (if mistaken) on Wikipedia protocol. RashersTierney (talk) 20:32, 19 October 2009 (UTC))

Yes - over 8 years now.99.135.170.179 (talk) 20:44, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Care to say under what identities? RashersTierney (talk) 20:55, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I've never been a member, and actually when I started it was the norm.99.135.170.179 (talk) 00:40, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

What claim?99.135.170.179 (talk) 01:40, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That Mee's account is the only one to 'survive'. As an account of the events this essay wouldn't be acceptable as an undergraduate history paper. RashersTierney (talk) 01:46, 21 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Do you have a link to another? Smyth's perhaps?99.135.170.179 (talk) 01:50, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I've already linked Kelly's account, as corroborated by others, specifically for your benefit. And less of the sarcasm. WP:CIVIL is not an optional extra. RashersTierney (talk) 01:59, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm sure it's me - but I can't find it. Can you be more specific? Thanks.99.135.170.179 (talk) 02:03, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Also note that it would not have been unusual for Smyth to have publicly refuted the charge made in the Irish Bulletin in the weeks before his death - as you have made reference to another account of the event, I simply guessed that the man at the center had left his account behind as well, be it in a report, interview or diary. Why you've chosen to see sarcasm in that is beyond me.99.135.170.179 (talk) 02:34, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You seem determined that the account was not substantially correct and so in need of refuting. Original witness testimony does not, apparently, suit your POV. Too bad. RashersTierney (talk) 02:40, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * What did I seek to refute?99.135.170.179 (talk) 02:47, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Enough of this nonsense. Read your own post above as highlighted. If you want to discuss matters further, keep it on the relevant talk page. RashersTierney (talk) 03:02, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Dude - I was trying to guess what you were talking about - it was a question to you on your talk page. 99.135.170.179 (talk) 03:07, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Nsaa (talk) 22:43, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

FYI
I reported the IP here. BigDunc 15:30, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Michael O'Brien (Irish politician)
I created this article about Michael O'Brien. Although an article with an identical name was deleted in 2007 I hope this one is well sourced enough to show why he's significant (a mayor and advocate of rights of abuse victims who made a very public speech about the traumas he has suffered). Autarch (talk) 20:46, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * He is certainly of sufficient notability to merit inclusion. That point should be made in the article. I'll say why, in case of a challenge. Again, great work. RashersTierney (talk) 20:52, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I also linked to Ferryhouse from his article and created an article on St. Patrick's Industrial School, Upton, linking to both school articles from Industrial Schools in Ireland.Autarch (talk) 19:42, 23 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry I haven't been giving these articles more time lately. Seem to have become somewhat sidelined. Best. RashersTierney (talk) 19:54, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Civility
Based on your comments at the talkpage and elsewhere, it would appear that you are having difficulty maintaining civility where the anonymous editor is concerned. In particular, I am concerned about this comment of yours, which was clearly targeted towards an editor, and was not related to the article. Please consider deleting or changing it. It is also very important that your future comments stay focused strictly on the content of the article, and not on the contributors. If you don't feel that you can do this, please consider removing the article from your watchlist for awhile, or spend time editing in other less contentious areas. If you do wish to continue editing these articles though, please consider a simple technique, which is to try and write all of your posts in the third person. Simply omitting the words "you" and "your" can have a remarkably positive effect on the tone of talkpage discussions. --Elonka 02:24, 23 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Duly noted. RashersTierney (talk) 02:31, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for understanding! I'm seeing it as a positive sign that both of you appear willing to reconsider recent actions. :) --Elonka 02:37, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

note
msg left as a reply at Elonka's talk page.99.135.170.179 (talk) 01:50, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Oriel House
Hi, just a quick question re what you said;

"The main thing to remember with Wikipedia is that it has little value unless material can be backed up with references, otherwise its just, well, the opinion of some anonymous person with - an opinion."

What happens when you know this material to be true but previously undocumented, ie A elderly family member passed on verbal information that hasn't been previously been documented. There is a lot of Irish history that has passed on with the people who were active at the time and this info has never been documented due to the sensitive nature of these operations. This does not make this information any less accurate. On top of that there is a lot of documented 'facts' in books that have subsequently been proven inaccurate.

If the Wiki author knows what they write to be true ie first hand, then should it not be documented on Wiki ?

Thanks,

Fallduff (talk) 19:06, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I had typed a quite long reply to your question, but seem to have somehow deleted it. The short answer to - should it not be documented on Wiki(pedia)? - is no. This is not the place to publish primary material. It will not last here and your efforts will be wasted in the long run. By all means record you relatives account. I would go so far as to say you have a responsibility to do so. Try to get the interest of a mainstream historian with a track record in this area. If it is finally published it could of course be used as a reference on Wikpedia. Uinseann MacEoin's Survivors is a good example of a 'collection of recollections' of people directly involved in the war for independence and the later conflicts. He broadly followed the recording technique used by the BMH. If you have specific questions as a follow up to this, don't hesitate to ask. Best. RashersTierney (talk) 23:01, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Goldenbridge
Just started St. Vincent's Industrial School, Goldenbridge and a category Industrial schools in the Republic of Ireland.Autarch (talk) 23:44, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Readily admit little knowledge re. Categories on Wikipedia, but should there not be a category 'Closed institutions' with a sub cat 'Closed Institutions in the Republic of Ireland'? Just an observation. RashersTierney (talk) 00:45, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Good point - there is a series of categories under Category:Educational institutions by year of disestablishment - I'll create the relevant categories under that.Autarch (talk) 01:03, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Have added those categories with the exception of Ferryhouse - will need to reread it carefully so as to know when it ceased to be an industrial school.Autarch (talk) 01:24, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Just noticed that category was never inserted - it should have been Category:Educational institutions by year of disestablishment. Also, there is now an article on Christine Buckley and there's a small update to the one on Mannix Flynn.Autarch (talk) 19:42, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Louis Henri, Duke of Bourbon
Sorry to disagree with you, but IP 211.64.138.49 was correct:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Louis_Henri,_Duke_of_Bourbon&diff=320347659&oldid=320116265

Regards, Frania W. (talk) 14:34, 1 November 2009 (UTC)


 * RashersTierney: We sent a msg to each other at the same time! All's well that ends well.  Cordialement!,  Frania W. (talk) 14:37, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
 * No prob. The system works (eventually)! :-) RashersTierney (talk) 14:39, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Oui ! Frania W. (talk) 14:43, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Rineen
Hi Rashers, thanks for the note. I may not be as new an editor as you think ;)

Anyway, yes I've been planning to do some work on Rineen for a while. Re sources, I have Ernie O'Malley's 'Raid and Rallies', and 'Blood on the Banner - The Republican Struggle in Clare' by Padraig O Ruairc. Both pretty Republican oriented, so if you know of anything from the other side that would be good too to balance it up.

Rineen seems to be notable not only for the ambush, but even more for the Black and Tan reprisals afterwards - some of the first and some of the worst in the WoI. I have to do a little bit of reading first then I'll get back to you.

78.16.152.18 (talk) 22:14, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Who said that? RashersTierney (talk) 02:00, 3 November 2009 (UTC)


 * That'll be me. Jdorney (talk) 23:18, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Welcome back! RashersTierney (talk) 23:21, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Jdorney (talk) 23:24, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Pejorative term
I never heard the word Pikey being used in Ireland (and I live there). However, it's widely used in England. Hope this helps. Hohenloh + 18:33, 8 November 2009 (UTC)


 * HI Hohenloh, I live there too and the only time I've heard it was when watching the film Snatch (film), and even then the term was used by Londoners. Thanks for reply, but the anon IP just keeps reverting my correction. RashersTierney (talk) 19:54, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Civil War
I was just looking at the Irish Civil War page and was considering whether it might not be a good idea to create a separate Guerrilla phase of the Irish Civil War (or some such title) page to slim down the article a bit. It was me who added all the detail but I do think it's a bit much for the average reader. This is somthing that's been bugging me for quite a while.

What do you think?Jdorney (talk) 23:47, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't really have strong views one way or the other, but it might be a way of being constructively engaged while keeping the head down, as the present 'uncivil war' rumbles on below the horizon. RashersTierney (talk) 00:13, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Indeed. I'm very much in "no surrender" mode re that, I have to say. Anyway, I think I'll do that, after leavinga message on the ICW talk page.Jdorney (talk) 10:31, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Re the above, I have that article up and running at Guerrilla Phase of the Irish Civil War. I've also substantially cut the main article. Your thoughts, as always, are welcome. Jdorney (talk) 15:59, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Commemoration
The Annual National Commemoration Services for those lost on Irish Ships during the Emergency and all Lost at Sea, will be held at 11.30 am on Sunday 22nd November 2009 starting in City Quay Church, Wreaths will be laid at the Irish Seaman's National Memorial, Refreshments in the Church Hall. After a break for lunch the company will reassemble for Evensong at 3.15 pm St. Patrick's Cathedral. ClemMcGann (talk) 19:42, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notice Clem. RashersTierney (talk) 22:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Irish Defence Forces
The Defence Acts 1954 to 1998 provide that "It shall be lawful for the Government to raise, train, equip, arm, pay and maintain defence forces to be called and known as Óglaigh na hÉireann or (in English) the Defence Forces." Usage on their official website also prefers the term "Defence Forces" as a title. --Kwekubo (talk) 12:38, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I would urge you to reconsider your move in accordance with WP:NC, before this turns into another Ireland-related naming debacle. Best. RashersTierney (talk) 12:45, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Do you mean that the words between brackets in the title might prove controversial? A similar formula for disambiguation is already used at Army Reserve (Ireland). What other body might "Defence Forces (Ireland)" refer to? --Kwekubo (talk) 12:55, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't be disingenuous. The Army Reserve article has just been renamed by you, hardly the basis for impartial precedent. The official web page for the Defence Forces is titled 'Irish Defence Forces' in clear recognition of 'common usage' criteria. Should this discussion not more properly be continued at the relevant Talk Page? RashersTierney (talk) 13:06, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Please assume good faith. I made that page move over five months ago. From what I can see the only title on the forces' website is "The Defence Forces". If this needs to be discussed further then I agree that Talk:Defence Forces (Ireland) would be the appropriate place. -Kwekubo (talk) 13:27, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I am assuming good faith. Sorry if I came across a bit snappy, but a reference to one of your own edits was hardly likely to be convincing. I am beginning to see the merit of your change, but would still like to hear the opinions of other eds. Best. RashersTierney (talk) 13:32, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Anon harrassment
Grrr, the anon has stirred the stubborness in me. GoodDay (talk) 15:03, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * They can do that to me sometimes too. Keep your usual cool (hockey apart) and much appreciated good humour :-) RashersTierney (talk) 15:08, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Okie Dokie. I'm gonna keep on trucking, if only to spite the anon. GoodDay (talk) 15:33, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Genetics
I've left a comment at Talk:Irish people. In case you hadn't already picked it up, this issue sprang up in various discussions here, here, here and here a few days ago. Since then, I think both DinDraithou and I (and Pondle and others) have come to the conclusion that it is possible to come to a common understanding of the complex issues involved, and try to move forward without too much (or, hopefully, any) acrimony. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:09, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I think you are taking a very collegial approach to this issue and it would be very helpful if others took a leaf from your book. I made some contributions at Talk:Genetic history of the British Isles, so I am not as unfamiliar with the issues as at least one editor seems to think. I don't think any point of contention on Wikipedia is beyond 'common understanding' (consensus), but there needs to be genuine engagement, not just veiled threats of 'edit wars' and 'reports' while we are in discussion, and without yet any edits on my part to the material in question. Cheers. RashersTierney (talk) 13:17, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Accusations and Idiocy
First throwing around unsupported Sock accusations is bad etiquette. Second the automatic assumption that no registered users are vandals is again bad etiquette. Third try reading the talk page or edit history before you revert that might give you some clue as to what is going on! Or perhaps talk to the other editors who have started on your path then realised the idiocy of their assumptions, villians don't always wear black hats you know! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.25.181.202 (talk) 08:55, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

History of terrorism
With reference to you posting at Talk:History of terrorism, which person are you thinking of? See also user:LSG280709 has contributed to History of terrorism and has been asked if they also edit using IP addresses in a similar way to this article (see User talk:LSG280709) that would seem to me to qualify for a check user on sock-puppet grounds. To do that see wp:check user and more specifically Sockpuppet investigations. If you decide to do this then let me know. The other possibility is to put in a comment at WP:ANI and see if other admins agree with a IP/new user block for a three month period as there appears to be reverses by multiple IP addresses by the same editor as indicated by uncivil comments. -- PBS (talk) 10:09, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi PBS. Thanks for your note. Re the pattern of disruptive editing at this article, I think there is a probable case of a single problematic editor using various IPs, conceivably in order to mask their edit history. I have asked the ed. at User talk:86.25.180.153 if they have contributed before (there may be a legit reason for IP hopping) but no reply except the ad hominem rant above - from very obviously the same editor at User talk:86.25.181.202. I also left a note at admin. User talk:EyeSerene who seems to have been 'overseeing' this article. There is also User talk:92.239.38.135, who appears to have claimed they had edited as LSG280709 (the acknowledgement was unsigned but if there is any doubt the page history would confirm). I think this is sufficient prima facia evidence to bring a checkuser enquiry, and would be grateful for practical guidance in doing so. Best. RashersTierney (talk) 12:59, 21 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I ran whois on the two IP addresses above. They are both physically close to each other and although they are different companies the style of editing editing suggests that they are being used by the same person. It is really simple to file a sockpuppet request I suggest you look through a few to see the style that is used. I have been involved in three of them since the start of this year 1, 2, 3 Don't know if looking at them will help you much. Anyway let me know if I can be of further help. -- PBS (talk) 20:51, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * FYI Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents -- PBS (talk) 11:46, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Apologies for the slow response. I don't edit much, if at all, over the weekend. I noticed that PBS has semi-protected the page. I think that's the best solution for now, as dealing with an IP-hopping disruptive editor is often an exercise in whack-a-mole. If you want to file an WP:SPI in the meantime, please do so, although because LSG280709 hasn't edited from that account for over a month, it might be declined as stale. However, if they resume editing disruptively or other accounts with similar modus operandi appear, feel free to drop me a note; where socking is obvious from the context, we don't need checkuser evidence before taking action. EyeSerene talk 14:57, 23 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for reply. The puppet-master in question has been at it for about 3 years. Still sifting through the garbage. RashersTierney (talk) 15:04, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Pecker Dunne
Hi, I am new to Wikipedia and I am not sure if I have the right link to communicate with you, so sorry if I am in the wrong place. You questioned my reference to the Pecker Dunne having lived on Galtymore Road, Drimnagh. Residents that I know and respect can remember him living in the house across the road from mine. He lived in 287 Galtymore Road. His father also played the violin and used to carry it under his coat. His mother was a most generous woman who took in two abandoned children and reared them along with her own. They were well liked in the area.

I have included a reference in the article to a booklet in which he mentions some of the above but at the moment I cannot find a reference to their address in Drimnagh. I hope that helps with your query of where I found my information.

I have looked at the articles that you have posted and you appear to be a man with much knowledge of Irish culture. I am trying to find information on a poet called Joe O'Brin. I am unsure of the spelling. The only public reference that I can find is that he spoke at Ronny Drews funeral. Any help you could give me would be much appreciated.

With many thanks Flameoak. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flameoak (talk • contribs) 13:34, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Commission of Investigation
I think the report may be published here - there will probably be a lot in it relevant to several articles.Autarch (talk) 18:10, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry about missing you the first time around - the report is actually here.Autarch (talk) 13:24, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

USC
Hi RT, you may be interested in ongoing revamp of Ulster Special Constabulary. 16:34, 24 November 2009 (UTC)