Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Celtic Tiger/archive1

Celtic Tiger
Partial self-nomination, i've spent quite a while doing up this article with the help of a few others, I think it now meets FA status, it details the main causes, the resurgence of the tiger, the 2001 downturn, challenges ahead and much more. CGorman 10:14, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Support, disclosing the fact that I made a couple of small edits. Filiocht 10:23, Oct 26, 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. Excellent article. Seabhcan 10:53, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. Well researched. Zerbey 15:10, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. Good, just one or two little quibbles:
 * The lead section says it refers to Ireland during that time, but didn't it refer to the economic growth?
 * Althought Celtic Tiger is mostly used to describe Irelands economic growth, the Celtic Tiger can also refer to Ireland in a more general manner in just the same way as people call Ireland The Emerald Isle. CGorman 17:38, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * The graphs could be improved on - they're slightly unclear. J OHN C OLLISON [ Ludraman] 16:50, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I would disagree - they are quiet clear, if someone really finds them difficult to see, then they can always click on them to see the orignial sized graph - but I maintain that there very clear. CGorman 17:38, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. Very nice. Tuf-Kat 17:31, Oct 26, 2004 (UTC)
 * Support - some minor comments, not worth objecting over: (i) CamelCase headings need addressing (in fact, should the article be celtic tiger?); (ii) I think the graphs and images are a bit blocky - do they need anti-aliasing?; (iii) the headline tiger image is a bit monochrome to be "green striped" - could someone colour it? -- ALoan 18:52, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Support - detailed, original material, also good referencing - good mix of images and links to other relevant things. Djegan 20:02, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment I want to support because this is great stuff, but the focus on so much material in an article under this term seems a little missaplied. For example, much of the article like the entire 'Challenges and threats ahead' section is not really about the term 'Celtic Tiger', but instead general material that should be in the much poorer article Economy of Ireland. I fixed the capitalization in the headings. I think the graphs are fine. The links to this article are buried in the places that I would go to look for information on the economy of Ireland, which seems to support the idea of this term being off a bit or even a bit misleading to what the article content is. - Taxman 20:51, Oct 26, 2004 (UTC)
 * Well the challenges and threats ahead are in reference to the continued resurgance of the Celtic Tiger 2, so I would feel that such material is necessary for this article. The term Celtic Tiger really is used as a description of the Irish Economy from the late 90's onwards, so in reality this article is about that economic period - not just a brief description of the term Celtic Tiger. CGorman 18:57, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I'm somewhat swayed by that argument, if you want to have this be the focus article on the Irish economy during the time period. But that then brings the question of is the Celtic Tiger II, really a widely agreed upon phenomenon, or widely used phrase.  If not, then much of that and the material I referenced above is out of place and is what makes this article awkward on what subject it does and should cover.  Also "The challenge is to spread the new wealth nationwide to remote areas such as Connemara and Donegal." is a value judgement, that needs to be attributed to someone or some group specifically or removed/more factually stated. - Taxman 03:07, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)
 * Yes it is agreed that the Tiger has returned (see RTE report July 04' as an example), so since this article deals with the Celtic Tiger period of Irish Economic history - then the content of the article is applicable to this topic. Also I have attributed the point "The challenge is to spread the new wealth nationwide to remote areas such as Connemara and Donegal." to an IDA report (click on the link beside the comment in the article and read the last section of the report). Have I addressed your concerns fully yet? CGorman 17:40, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment It would be much better for this kind of stuff to be at Economy of Ireland. "Celtic Tiger" is just a nickname. Gdr 21:03, 2004 Oct 26 (UTC)
 * As pointed out above, this article deals with the economy of Ireland during a period lasting from the late 90's till today, so all economic information for that period should be relevent. As also pointed out, it is unfair to criticise this article for the poverty of another. I plan on working on the Economy of Ireland article next - I plan to include a reasonable history section with see alsos to articles such as Celtic Tiger (which covers 1997-2004), the Lemass Era (which covers the mid 60's), perhaps an article on De Valera protectionism (which covers the first few years of Irish independance) and maybe an article the Charlie Haughey's corrupt era (the 1980's) CGorman 17:45, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm inclined to agree. We wouldn't have an article on the asian economies at 'asian tiger', and so by comparison I don't think this belongs here either. &rarr;Raul654 01:42, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC)
 * We do have an article on the East Asian Tigers. Both subjects are academic research topics. I think it is unfair to criticise this article for the poverty of another, though obviously some of this material could pump up the economy article. The Economy of Ireland needs to take a longer time frame and cover different economic sectors. This article is a more detailed child article concerned with modern economic history, i.e. since the 1990's and is concerned with causes and derterminants of Ireland's economic miracle. ChrisG 18:11, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I stand corrected. &rarr;Raul654 23:47, Oct 29, 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. Oppose, until the POV on "causes" is eliminated. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (hopefully!)]] 02:21, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC)
 * I have backed up the claims made by various reports and articles. I have rewritten and backed up the section at the end of causes relating to Charlie McCreevy, Mary Hearney and Bertie Ahern - which I felt was the main reason you objectd - I admit, it was biased and unsupported. I hope I have rectified your concerns. CGorman 20:29, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. ChrisG 18:11, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Support ZayZayEM 03:33, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Support zoney &#09827; talk 12:36, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)