User talk:Traditional unionist/Archives/2008/August

Help
Someone called Matthew hk is repeatedly vandalising pages that I have created, and then accusing ME of vandalism when I rectify them, and threatening to block me from editing. Is there anything I can do to resolve this? (The problem has arisen because the Irish First Division and Irish Second Division have become defunct and replaced by the IFA Championship and IFA Interim Intermediate League, and so I redirected the former pages to the latter pages, and also updated the text to make the articles accurate and up-to-date. This Matthew hk character keeps undoing the redirects, and even deleting the text on the new pages. He won't engage in discussion, as he has ignored messages I have left on his talk page. If you go to my Talk page you can see the messages he has left. Any advice you can give me is appreciated. Mooretwin (talk) 11:19, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok, I've done a "proper" move on both articles. Hope that's okay :) I've also left a note with Matthew explaining what went wrong here and how Mooretwin was making good-faith edits and trying to communicate. Should be all sorted now :) - A l is o n  ❤ 17:17, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I don't know what I did wrong. I followed previous instructions and used the "Move" tab. Mooretwin (talk) 21:51, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Much appreciated Ali.Traditional unionist (talk) 18:49, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your help on this matter. Unfortunately, though, the pages have only partially been fixed. The pages are directing to the new names, but my edits to update the pages have gone, and so the articles are out-of-date with incorrect information. THe edit history is gone - is there any way to get it back. A fair bit of work has been lost. I left a message on Alison's page but she appears to be moving house or something! Any help you can offer is much appreciated. Mooretwin (talk) 21:14, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Mooretwin - I think I know what happened there. It's in your deleted edits somewheres. I'll get a moment later on here and undelete some of your stuff & we can see if they can be found. Sit tight ;) - A l is o n  ❤ 23:12, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

The Troubles in Portadown
Thank you for your input on that article. It isn't one I'm particularly keen on editing much on. Can I ask why we should keep the Hamill murder in? It seems that third parties have decided we can only list multiple murders and while I agree that it was a most shocking and heinous crime why do you think we should include it and not other, equally shocking murders, in the town during the troubles? The Thunderer (talk) 11:00, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Take a look at the policy on inclusion on WP:NIR. Murders which are notable are includable even if they were single.  Clearly the Hamill murder is within that context.Traditional unionist (talk) 11:01, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I think there are many murders in that particular town during the troubles which fall into that category. The torture inflicted upon certain individuals makes many of them notable. Isn't it strange too that no-one bothered with that article until I started editing it? Do you think I am being stalked?The Thunderer (talk) 11:03, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * You may say that, I couldn't possibly comment. Be aware that I am talking about notability purely in WP terms.  Clearly there were mny terrible actions which could be considered notable, but in WP terms, Hamill is a clear cut case.Traditional unionist (talk) 11:05, 4 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Hmm - perhaps I should do some research on that.  Portadown was the scene of many terrible incidents.  That's if my personal stalkers allow me to post any further information.The Thunderer (talk) 11:14, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Here's a perfectly reasonable explanation for the use of murder/killing.  Murder is the unlawful taking of life.  Killing suggests war between two countries.  No terrorist organisation in the Ulster troubles was backed by any state or judicial system, therefore terrorist killings are murder - in violation of the laws of the land, whether anyone was caught for it or not.  It matters not that the IRA/INLA etc or any of the Loyalist organisations claimed to be "at war".  When caught, these people were tried by the civilian judiciary, not courts martial.   Any explanation in favour of "killing" is POV pushing and propaganda - it doesn't matter who by - and can only be seen as one side or the other trying to claim legitimacy for their favoured organisation.    Can we list this somewhere and seek concensus?The Thunderer (talk) 13:32, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Congrats!
Well done :) - A l is o n  ❤ 14:11, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I'd like to thank my family............who had nothing to do with it...........Traditional unionist (talk) 15:34, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

A modest proposal
Dear Traditional Unionist,

In reading some of the pages in the Northern Ireland section, I have come to the conclusion that the real flavor of the place cannot be had by reading the articles, which are in my opinion uniformly biased, but by reading the discussion pages, there's the real flavor, with nit-picking semantic flame-wars everywhere you look. Hope of "objectivity" is futile. People claiming to be objective are always espousing the view-point of the powerful.

The truth about the North of Ireland or Northern Ireland, which term you use states what side you are on, is that opinion about everything has two sides.

This is my proposal, that you allow the creation of two pages for each one we currently have. My area of expertise is databases. Objectivity is at least conceivable in this realm. In the question of "The Troubles", which is the unionist way of calling them, or "The War", which is the nationalist way, there are two side which, even in the choice of language, are completely incompatible.

First, let me disclose my own biases, and please allow me to thank you for disclosing yours. I am from the States, first of all, and my using that word, States, and not the other, American, shows that I have been an expatriot. I have lived in French Canada, and I speak fluent Quebecois. I was born in Maryland to an old Catholic family, and I moved from that Catholic state to Quebec, again Catholic, and then to New Mexico, again Catholic. I'm from one of those families called Lace-Curtain Irish, that is, I trace my descent from the ruling class of Ireland, and in particular from the Barons of Fagan, from Dervogilla, from the kings of Meath. We had to leave in the 1600s. Religiously, I am a Hicksite Quaker. Politically, I am a Democrat, and support Barak Obama. I will not state my political affiliations for the politics of the world outside the US, as I believe in non-meddling, and so I want the UKers to figure out their own problems, and they don't need help from someone like me, who is ignorant of the matters at hand. I am a pacifist, and so I feel that the people on both sides have it wrong, and I believe that Jesus wouldn't care for killings of any kind, judicial or extra-judicial.

My own family was ashamed of its Irishness, and of its Catholicism.

I had to live forty years before anyone would explain to me that all four of my grandparents were Catholics, and I grew up a Unitarian. My first experience of being Catholic was to be beaten up for it as a school boy. My parents, in protest against the neo-Nazis who had painted a swastika on the Temple, sent me to Hebrew School, where I learned what it was like to be beaten up for being Jewish.

I myself thought that all this stuff about the conflict in The North was old news, and unimportant, and it wasn't until I came for the first time to the UK, by driving north from Kilkenny, that I started to get it. It started with making B&B reservations in Enniskillen. All the B&Bs we'd stayed at, my sister and I, in The South were met with bright, cheery, I'd say almost American attitudes that were genuinely interested in our staying at their homes. In The North, that experience was completely different. Anyone who says that the Republic and the North are the same country are ignoring the simple fact that they are culturally as dissimilar as they could be. The person answering the phone was apprehensive, and they beat around the bush, and asked a number of questions before having any reaction at all. Finally, the fateful question came up as we made the reservation. Surname.

"Cassidy," I said.

"Oh," she said, with a long slide down in pitch, and the rest of the talk was hostile.

When we called the Catholic-owned B&B, in Ballycastle, our stop after Enniskillen, we got the same apprehensive treatment, and then, they asked for our Surname.

"Cassidy," I said.

"Oh!" she said, with a bright upswing in tone, and the rest of the conversation was as if a long-lost cousin had called, with an exaggerated concern for our welfare.

I'm pretty certain that if we'd said "Jones" or "Bragdon" or "Blackwell" or "Mastin", which are just as much our family names, we'd have gotten the opposite response. Every single thing we did once we crossed the invisible border was colored by what side we were on.

When I first entered the Talk page for the article on the RUC, I was planning on complaining about the use of the word "murder" for "extra- judicial killing", since it's clear to me that calling it murder implies its being "illegal", which all depends on whether you accept or reject the legality of the institutions involved.

I now believe that the only way to accurately portray any issue in The North of / Northern Ireland, is to present *both* sides, in their full Unionist/Nationalist glory, full of the polemics and non-objective language that is used by both sides.

I myself have irretrievably become a "nationalist", because of one thing exactly. In Enniskillen, we asked for a phone book. The Cassidys, more properly, Clan Cassidy, or the O'Cassidys, are from a place called, again it makes sence, Bally Cassidy, just north of Enniskillen. Only there is not a single Cassidy or O'Cassidy in the entire phone book. We have been ethnicly cleansed. We were actually run out of Bally Cassidy by private security forces, the moment they found out we were Cassidys. "This is a private community," we were told.

It was some years later, having filled myself with Nationalist literature, that I first came to the rest of the UK, having been in the Ukraine, with a full-day layover on my way back to New Mexico. And I was surprised to see that the Londoners I'd met were sympathetic to my point of view, harbored no ill will, were not suspicious of Irish-Americans, did not treat me like a terrorist, and were, just not at all like the Prods I'd met in The North. I *love* England. But I don't think I'll be going back to Northern Ireland.

So this is my proposal, that Wikipedia allow the creation of parallel pages on each subject, giving each side.

We need to remember what Wikipedia is for. It's for people who aren't from Ireland, either half, to learn about people who are. I find that only the British point of view is presented here in the US, for example, and only the British point of view is presented in Wikipedia, only its been given a coating of political correctness, which serves no one.

It is natural for the first composers of pages about any given institution or phenomenon to be written by its proponents, and for revisions to be done by detractors. Let's face it. Proponents know more about the thing than detractors, because it's not really a very pleasant thing to obsess about something you hate, whereas it's lovely to obsess about things you love. Read both sides, and you have a better picture. The vehemence and vitriol, if left out, leaves the story bland and nonsensical. Unionists are terrified of union with the rest of Ireland, and nationalists are terrified of an independant North, and both sides have real reasons for their concerns. That it's all a crock of shit, on both sides, is apparent to any foreigner who really looks into it, and that the Protestants of NI and the Catholics share a remarkably similar culture that is nothing like that of the UK or the RoI, makes the whole thing all the more pitiable.

I'm glad I don't live there.

So that's my proposal, and I've written to you because there's no point in talking to the people you agree with. To change things, you need to talk to people who are able to respectfully advocate the other side.

I found your writing to be straight-forward, heart-felt, consistant, and free of polemic. You seem to have respect for people who disagree, and you seem to be able to be civil.

I look forward to hearing your opinions, if you care to share them.

Sincerely,

Maxxwell M. Cassidy, Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA, (a Protestant Nationalist, no they do not contradict) Nerodog (talk) 18:40, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey there, fellow-namesake :) What you've written has been fascinating and insightful, BTW - A l is o n  ❤ 18:55, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I would like to thank MAxwell for the effort put into that. To try and be helpful however, the Unionist and Catholic people in Northern Ireland don't actually share a culture which is that similar. The Unionists are (generally) Scots/Irish or Ulster/Scots Protestants if you prefer, whereas the Nationalists are (generally) Roman Catholic and have a different philosophy on life entirely. There are similarities yes, but in general both communities regard their cultures differently - therein lies a good part of the problem. There are many prople from both cultures who accept the views of the other and live happily beside each other and socialise. There are a small number in both cultures who have very extreme views however and that's what we're seeing here. A dedicated attempt by one side or another to influence the weigtht of an article so that it reflects their point of view better. Striving for neutrality is very difficult.The Thunderer (talk) 19:07, 13 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Maxxwell, I'd like to dispel a myth you seem to have about Northern Ireland. Firstly, I'd like to let you know that you are not the only person in the world with a sob-story regarding being the 'wrong religion' - no matter what that religion is. Northern Ireland isn't the only place in which religious intolerance exists, though it is a 'shining' example, unfortunately.


 * You seem to have become a "nationalist" by virtue of (finding out) the fact that some of your ancestors were Roman Catholic and, subsequently, reading nationalist literature. As this seems a sad reason for dictating a political viewpoint, I would challenge you to therefore to read unionist literature (note: unionist - not Loyalist). Bear in mind that well over a third of Roman Catholics in Northern Ireland are likely to support the idea of it remaining a part of the United Kingdom.


 * The "myth" I speak of is your perception that "The Troubles" is a term used by Protestants, and that Catholics use the term "The War". In fact, this is not the case. "The Troubles" is not a phrase which is championed by any one side. There are those, of course, who are of a more extreme opinion - Republicans - who would tend to favour reference to a "war"... the IRA engaged in guerilla warfare. On attending a debate hosted by Bernadette McAliskey (nee Devlin), I noted that she indicated her disapproval of the term "The Troubles". However, most nationalists I have known use the term with as much regularity as any 'Protestant', and never seem ill-at-ease with it. Also, I suspect it's a minority of people who would purposely avoid referring to Northern Ireland. Again, the ones that do are likely to be extremists. Nearly a third of Roman Catholics in Northern Ireland are likely to describe themselves primarily as "Northern Irish", if given the choice.


 * It's an odd experience you had with the B&B phone calls and not one that, I would suggest, would be a common occurrence in Northern Ireland. People here don't generally get hostile at the mere mention of a surname - particularly that of a foreigner. The kinds of people who offer B&B services are likely to expect all sorts of different types of people, with different opinions and backgrouds. For the most part therefore, they have to be quite tolerant. Your own surname isn't one that's particularly associated with Roman Catholicism, nationalism or Republicanism. Your surname indicates possible roots in what is now County Fermanagh and south of it, or of Clare direction (Dal Cais is the same tribe from which Brian Boru was descended, and has some possible connection with the Cassidy name) - possibly as old as 400 AD. My own roots have my ancestors placed mainly in Scotland and Ulster. Protestantism is a relatively new idea and politics in Ireland have become convoluted as a result of the religious wars that took place throughout Europe - not just in Ireland. Ireland was just one location in that 'theatre of war'.


 * You talk of the Cassidys having been "ethnically cleansed" by "private security forces".. not something I was aware of, there having been so much 'ethnic cleansing' having occurred throughout Ireland by and to peoples of various factions throughout the centuries. I'm quite convinced that the experience you seemed to have had with "Prods in Northern Ireland" is an oddity, just as I would be of a similar opinion had you suggested you were enthusiastically unionist and had similar experiences with Catholics here. Of course, few of us wear labels that clearly indicate what religious background we're from.


 * Having spent time in the US myself, I'm not entirely convinced that a "British point of view" is quite so prevalent as you seem to think.. and that certainly isn't the case (certainly in my opinion at least) in Wikipedia! The story of the British Isles, and of Ireland in particular, is anything but bland without any vitriol. The history of events here is as interesting as it is complex and convoluted and isn't without its fair share of ironies (just one example being how King William III had the Pope's blessing for his mission to Ireland).


 * As a unionist, I can tell you that I'm not "terrified" of a union with the rest of Ireland - I just don't want it to happen - ergo: I am unionist. An "independent North" is not something that has much support at all, by either of the two main camps.


 * I don't think your attempt at a solution here is workable for Wikipedia, as admirable as that attempt is. :)


 * Without trying to sound patronising, I think you have discovered this information about your ancestors fairly recently and perhaps you still have a lot to learn about the political myriad that is Northern/Irish/British politics. I wish you good luck.. at the very least: know your enemy! ;) --Setanta747 (talk) 03:37, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Another superb dissertation. I really enjoyed reading that Setanta.  If I could add; the major source of discontent would appear to be from the IRA since 1922.  They would seem to have made to decision to force independence on the six counties because of a misapprehension about "Occupation by Crown forces".  Totally missing the concept of Unionism and ruining the peace and stability of a small country which, outside Belfast was mainly a rural agronomy where people were united through hard work and centuries of intermarriage.  In doing so they have taught sectarian hatred to several generations which will take a century to dispell.  In the modern age this unwanted intervention is being turned into the story of "Freedom Fighters" by clever propagandists.   If only they'd seen the lives of my Protestant and Catholic friends in our rural idyll being destroyed after 1969, they'd tell a different story.  Northern Ireland is one of the few places in the world where a minority grouping tried to overturn the wishes of the majority through violence without mandate.The Thunderer (talk) 14:23, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

UDR Proposal
I have started a work page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:The_Thunderer/Ulster_Defence_Regiment and also posted a set of objectives on the talk page. I've invited BigDunc and others to participate in an editing and discussion session to see if we can agree something which might resolve the issues which seem to exist. I would very much appreciate your examining the objectives and perhaps commenting or correcting anything which you think is inappropriate.The Thunderer (talk) 14:00, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Jaysus but you didn't half hold back there. I was expecting you to get wired in about it. LOLThe Thunderer (talk) 09:43, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Ireland/ROI Questions at Manual of Style (Ireland-related articles)
This is a courtesy notice to say that the three original 'polls' (now called "Questions") at Manual of Style (Ireland-related articles) (here), were amended during the voting process. This was due to initial confusion in their meaning. They are now unambiguous, and fully according to their original intent. You might like to check your contribution. --Matt Lewis (talk) 14:27, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for reverting vandalism on my page, that is a sock of a user that I had blocked a while ago. They had a few accounts and are not my biggest fan and i'm sure will be back again at some time. BigDunc Talk 14:48, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Not just at the moment, but at the end of next week I'll have several. And then a few more.Traditional unionist (talk) 14:58, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Right to join a union
I believe that the right to join a union was introduced by the Trade Union Act 1871, but I can't find anything giving absolute confirmation of this. There certainly wasn't a right before this, as trade unions were previously unsure of their legal position. Prior to 1871, workers could certainly form and join unions, but the unions and their actions were subject to a variety of legal challenges. One piece of evidence - our article on the British police strikes in 1918 and 1919 clearly shows that police were able to join a union then, and suggests that they could have formed one in the earl 1870s, if they had so chosen. Warofdreams talk 22:46, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Interesting - I just found a book on employment relations which states that the statutory right was only introduced by the Employment Protection Act 1975. Either way, it's before Thatcher. Warofdreams talk 23:08, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Just to clarify - I've taken this as being the right to join a union, if you can find a union which will take you. But unions have some say over who they take as members, and in Northern Ireland, there is apparently no legislation governing who unions accept - so they could use pretty much any grounds to pick and choose members, should they so wish.  Directgov has something on this. Warofdreams talk 23:27, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Opinion
TU, I'd very much appreciate your careful eye and opinion here if you have the time? The Thunderer (talk) 05:44, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Joe Brolly
You said :--- WP policy dictates that the correct name for County Londonderry be used throughout. Also, Joe Brolly was born in Northern Ireland. If you persist with your reverts you will be blocked.Traditional unionist (talk) 12:18, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

The correct name for where you refer to is County Derry and not Londonderry. Joe Brolly was born in Northern Ireland which is on the island of Ireland so your revert is incorrect. Please point me to the WP Policy that shows that Derry is not called Derry.

Presumably this incorrect WP Policy can be changed by users? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seankelly2002 (talk • contribs) 12:35, 28 August 2008 (UTC) `

Can we not move out of the dream world and call it Derry, Co. Derry? Why must Wikipedia be littered with rubbish by using imposed meaningless names? It is exactly this type of posturing that it giving Wikipedia its bad name. What needs to be done to get the names changed correctly and permanently? Thanks.

Inceidentally this "WP:IMOS. This recognises that there is no such place, and never has been such a place, as Co Derry" is extremely offensive and totally incorrect —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seankelly2002 (talk • contribs) 12:52, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Re:Imagry
Sorry, I'm late for a real-life engagement- I'll explain tomorrow or later this evening. Short answer: maybe. J Milburn (talk) 16:03, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
 * After a quick look, I would say yes. A free image of the subjects could not be provided, as they are deceased, and the painting has little commercial value to its copyright holder, as the copyright holder is unknown. The image would have to be of a low resolution and have a detailed fair use rationale for each use. If the painting is outdoors in a public place (say, a mural) then you could probably take a picture of it freely anyway, due to the freedom of panorama. J Milburn (talk) 15:05, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Take A Butchers?
You may want to give this the once over. The Thunderer (talk) 00:22, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice
Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 20:22, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Ronald Bunting
Here is an article that I feel is well worth while expanding, if any info can be found. I vaguely remember his name being bandied about when I was very young, round about the time of Burntollet. My interest has been severely provoked by the fact that this (apparantly) rabid Loyalist, who went as far as to form his own vigilante group who were one of the key elements in the starting of the most recent troubles in Ireland, had a son who had totally opposite views to his father. Going so far as to join the Stickies and then INLA the guy finishes up getting done in by the UDA? We all know there were Proddies in the IRA but this has to be the story of the century with regards to them? I see you were involved in the early stages of the page - can you shed any light on possible sources? The Thunderer (talk) 12:54, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Alas not. Any work I did on him was taken from research in the public archives, which was minimal.Traditional unionist (talk) 13:49, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I've found one or two things which may be of use. I'll see can I will myself to do something on the article soon. The Thunderer (talk) 16:19, 31 August 2008 (UTC)