Loading AI tools
Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting --~~~~ at the end.
If you leave a comment, I will usually reply to it on this page rather than on your own talk page.
Start a new talk topic
Hi! Welcome to Wikipedia. I'm not actually part of the Wikipedia unofficial welcoming committee, I just noticed you made some contributions to Irish topics. There's actually a group of Irish Wikipedians working on improving the Irish topic articles. If you feel like it you should visit Wikipedia_talk:Irish wikipedians' notice board and introduce yourself. No doubt some member of the welcoming committee will drop you a note soon with all sorts of useful links. In the mean time if you need help with anything, or just want to say hello, you can contact me on my talk page. 
—Rory ☺ 15:40, Oct 8, 2004 (UTC)
From the date above, I see you've been here for a while! Still, just to say welcome to another editor working on Irish-related articles. Since you didn't get a welcome with a list of links, I'll provide it - though I'm sure you've fairly much settled in now!
If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.
You might find these links helpful in creating new pages or contributing: How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style. You should read our policies at some point too. If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.
If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump, or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!
You can help improve the articles listed below! This list updates frequently, so check back here for more tasks to try. (See Wikipedia:Maintenance or the Task Center for further information.)
Fix spelling and grammar
Fix wikilinks
Update with new information
Expand short articles
Check and add references
Fix original research issues
Improve lead sections
Add an image
Help counter systemic bias by creating new articles on important women.
Help improve popular pages, especially those of low quality.
That would be right from the IRELAND 2002 Census. ℬastique▼talk 15:05, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- These are the figures I added together (from 2002 census):
- from Dublin Suburbs:
- Terenure-Cherryfield 2,228
- Terenure-Greentrees 2,980
- Terenure-St. James 3,108
- from Dublin City South:
Yes, I created the current map myself. I'm far from happy with it, and have a better map to work with now (see the section shown in Western Rail Corridor). Unfortunately the new map isn't complete - essentially I've only added the WRC to it at present. I hope to complete it in the form of a map of all railways that existed in Ireland (colour-coded by the railway co. that built/took them over, e.g. GSWR, MGWR, D&SE, GNR, etc.) - after that I can redo the current lines map.
Your best bet is to perhaps redraw the grey lines on the existing map in some different colour/shade. As is, I've just noticed that the Antrim line is the wrong colour at the moment - I had fixed it but re-introduced the error when I fixed Farranfore's location. See the image history.
There was a claim that the driver of the armoured car was in the pay of the Brit secret service and he shot Collins. However I approve of your deletion, unless there is a reference which can be used. --ClemMcGann 14:00, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for the support. To be honest, I'm quite happy for the CIRA supporters to waste their time vandalizing online encyclopedias, rather than blowing people up! Demiurge 09:58, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
Hi, this is a circular to Wikipedians in Ireland to draw your attention to Wikimedia UK, where the establishment of a local Wikimedia chapter for the United Kingdom (and possibly for the Republic of Ireland) is being discussed. See the talk page, as well as the mailing list; a meetup will take place to discuss matters in London in September, for anyone who can get there. On another topic, plans are being drawn up for a UK bid for Wikimania 2006, which would be conveniently close to Ireland. On the other hand, Dublin's bid was one of the final three last year - might we bid again? --Kwekubo 19:32, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
A user is trying to have the Template:Irish Republic infobox deleted. Your comments would be welcome. FearÉIREANN
\(caint) 22:22, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
Ryano, when the British courts found Roger Casement guilty of high treason, they officially and formally declared him to be a traitor. That is not the mere POV of a Wikipedia contributor.64.12.117.11 13:38, 10 November 2005 (UTC)PerryMason
- I've responded to this on Talk:Irish people. In summary, I don't think it's necessarily POV to term him a "British traitor", but I do think it's POV to use it in the context of a short label on such an article. --Ryano 14:06, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
Ryano. Please keep this article NPOV. The Doctorite of Ian Paisley is disputed. That is clear. However, both sides should be put. The Catholic Church agrees with what I have said. This is stated aim of Wikipedia. No matter how many people from Dublin like yourself disagree, NPOV must be kept at all times. This whole article is highly POV, due to meddling on yours and others parts. However, I for one would like to make it NPOV. Wallie 16:28, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
Ryano. I cannot understand why you and others are trying to blank out everything I say. I am trying my best to accommodate you. As mentioned, I am only trying to get some NPOV into this article. Wallie 18:27, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
- Hi Wallie, I'm not trying to blank out everything you say. I too want to see the article conform to NPOV, and will support any reasonable effort to do so. At present I'm only really interested in the issue of Paisley's titles, as I think it essential that the article qualify Paisley's use of the title "Doctor". It is not usual for somebody with an honorary doctorate to be so widely known as "Doctor", and it would be misleading if the article didn't address this. I hope you will accept my good faith on these, even though I do live in Dublin :) To address the specific edits of yours I reverted:
- 1) The formulation "At the time of the award of this degree some argued that Bob Jones University was a segregationist, unaccredited Christian college which banned African-American students from its campus." is not appropriate for the context, as it creates a dispute which probably never happened, in order to imply some doubt over the claims about BJU. Either the claims about BJU are true, in which case they should stand, or they are false, in which case they should be removed altogether. I'm not an expert on BJU, but as far as I'm aware it is not disputed that these were its policies at the time. The WikiPedia policy WP:WEASEL is relevant to this point.
- On this point, I will concede that I am doubtful of the relevance of the "segregationist" part of the sentence. This is not directly relevant to the nature of Paisley's degree, although it is factual. If you had removed that part of the sentence in your edit I wouldn't have reverted it, although I suspect others may have.
- 2) The fact that the Catholic Church have used "Dr Ian Paisley" in one or more documents does not have any bearing on the status of his degree. The Catholic Church, or anyone else for that matter, cannot change the fact that it is an honorary degree awarded by an unaccredited college and not an MD or Ph.D. It is acknowledged elsewhere in the article that the title is widely used, this is the very reason why the section qualifying the nature of his degree is needed.
- If you have other NPOV concerns about the article please let me know and I will take a look at them. --Ryano 22:02, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
- Thank you for your reply. It is the heavy implications placed in this text that I don't like. It implies that Ian Paisley is incompetent and a racist, and his degree is worth zilch. I do not think that you personally are trying to delete everything I say. But one person in particular is, and will likely continue to do so.. I just get the feeling that I am outnumbered. I am trying to bring some NPOV into the article. I think that the majority have made up their mind already and taken a clear position. Paisley's main protagonist, Gerry Adams has a much more favorable article. Shouldn't the articles have a similar tone? Wallie 13:48, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
- They probably should. I haven't looked at the Adams article in any detail, but I will take a look when I get a chance. --Ryano 14:33, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
Ryano,you may not be aware that I have written some articles about Coins of Ireland & Banknotes of Ireland. Could you please take a look & see if my use of the Erse language is correct, including the placement of the fada accent mark? If you know the Erse names for the decimal coins (including the Euro coins), you are more than welcome to add these in. - (Aidan Work 01:18, 17 November 2005 (UTC))
- Hi Aidan, I'll take a look at those when time allows. The first thing I notice is the use of "Erse" rather than "Irish" - Erse is really an archaism, and is sometimes used to refer to versions of Gaelic before Modern Irish. As the phrases in question are all in Modern Irish I don't think "Erse" is appropriate. --Ryano 12:19, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
Ryano, I am sorry if my use of the term 'Erse' in reference to the Irish language is considered a bit insensitive. I wanted to emphasise the difference between it & the Scots-Gaelic language. - (Aidan Work 00:32, 18 November 2005 (UTC))
- I don't know if it's insensitive, but it is certainly archaistic. Also, it may not be terribly useful for distinguishing between Irish and Scots Gaelic, as apparently it used to refer to both these languages. In any case, "Irish", with a link to Irish Language is the common usage here on Wikipedia. --Ryano 13:43, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
I didn't delete Emmeline Pankhurst, Belo, Gusmao etc. I reverted back to an earlier version, as all sorts of earlier names were deleted. It was definitely not my intention to remove them. The trouble is that some people delete a number of names and then add more. It is too complex to see what is going on. It is easier for them to put their names back. One thing I have found though, is that the strongest player of this game usually wins, right or wrong. I am not that strong so usually lose. I believe this page is not for heroes, but for victors, primarily British and American, as afterall they are the victors. Wallie 12:44, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
- I agree that it's a dodgy list, it appears to be an invitation to edit wars. I'm considering putting it up for deletion. --Ryano 12:56, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
I don't know if I saw your name as one of those taking part in this debate in the past, but it's come up again - there's a call to delete the Category:Irish-Scots, and the page Irish-Scots.
I'm against deleting these - the arguments for deleting (so far) are that
- it's not a clearly defined community - though I would argue, how else do we categorise the (tens of thousands of) Irish people who settled in Scotland, and their descendants? "Irish-Catholics" will not do (can't imagine James Connolly describing himself as an Irish-Catholic)
- how far do you go back? - which to me is crap, as (eg) Ronald Reagan gets to be an Irish-American and a Scottish-American, though he'd have to go back centuries...
- it's the same population as Ulster Scots - which it's patently not.
I created the original stub for "Irish-Scots", and my first draft was basically crap, but I've improved it since.
Anyway, please add your tuppence worth...and please vote "NO"!
Camillus
talk|contribs 23:12, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
- Hi Camillus, thanks for the note, but I don't think I contributed to this discussion previously. I'm ambivalent about categories for ethnic or cultural groups, e.g. List of Irish-Americans, but I think the Irish-Scots article is probably worth keeping. --Ryano 10:37, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
Really! I'm off to but a copy, can't see it online. Thanks. CGorman 13:36, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
- Just saw it! Thanks for letting me know. CGorman 13:59, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
I invite you to have a look at this article and then vote for a Speedy Delete on the article's section of the "Articles for Deletion".
Camillustalk|contribs 00:24, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
- I had already done so! --Ryano 10:35, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
Ryano - I'm fixing links to a disambig page. It is not inaccurate linking, as the disambig page for BC points users to the Anno Domini article, which has info on BC and what it means. Hope you understand, and thanks in advance. Search4Lancer 23:03, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
- Sorry, my mistake, I wasn't aware this was the preferred disambiguation of BC. --Ryano 00:36, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
There is a WP:TFD vote to delete Template:Irish Republicanism. In my view the template is fatally flawed in a host of areas, littered with inaccuracies and would be a guaranteed source of endless POV battles between SFs, RSFs, 32 County nutcases, etc etc. We only need to look at the POV nightmares at the various IRA pages to see the nightmares that could be caused by a template that tries to describe who is in and who is outside Irish republicanism, who is a key figure and who isn't. Redking made an interesting suggestion in the debate where he suggested that in effect the template is part if a campaign of normalisation of the Provos to make them legitimate. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 19:09, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
It's just that it lacks clarity. Who owns it now? Who owned it after the Restoration? I presume "established church" refers to the Church of Ireland, but why was it taken off them, if it was?
Lapsed Pacifist 19:21, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
I've had go at cleaning up the Daniel O'Connell article. Do you think its ready for the clean up tag to be removed? Jdorney 00:56, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
- Nice work! Yes, I will remove the cleanup tag, your edits are very much along the lines of what I thought needed to be done. --Ryano 09:35, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
I know you contribute to http://www.politics.ie/wiki, and I wanted to ask you a couple of questions. I recently lifted a couple of articles from there to here, assuming the same fair use guidelines apply. Stumason has since pointed out to me that they were lifted in turn (almost word for word) from http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/ and http://sinnfein.ie. Do you think whoever copied them into politics.ie obtained permission, or was it something that was overlooked?
Lapsed Pacifist 17:18, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
- I haven't contributed to the politics.ie wiki for a while, but from what I can remember the user "Padraig" added a lot of profiles of Sinn Féin representatives which may have been cut-and-paste from the Sinn Féin web site. I believe Padraig is Padraig3uk on Wikipedia, so you could ask him if he obtained permission. I don't think copyright issues have received much attention on the politics.ie wiki, so it's quite possible that it was just overlooked. --Ryano 18:31, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
You wrote: Please don't mis-use "vandalism"
On this edit [1] on Provisional Irish Republican Army, you used the edit summary "Revert vandalism". The edit you reverted appears to have been made in good faith, and it is unfair to accuse the user of vandalism. Please don't misuse "vandalism" in edit summaries. Thanks. --Ryano 10:40, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
My reply: The edit I called vandalism restored two changes I had repeatedly made, and asked to discuss on the talk page. These were the use of 'descending' rather my preferred 'demonstrating' to describe the protest in Dublin after the Warrinton bomb, and the characterisation of the two innocent victims of the Canary Wharf bombing as 'Pakistanis'. The reverts, by user 68.35.182.234, were indeed vandalism and I would have no hesitation in using the term again if something similar occurred. HTH Guinnog 19:26, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
- Well, you can call that vandalism if you wish, not knowing much about the recent edit history I can't comment. However in reverting back to a version before your anonymous adversary's last edit, you also reverted several edits made in good faith by other users, which is why I don't think the edit summary was appropriate. --Ryano 22:13, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
- I do take your point. Next time I would try to merge the good edits into my edit rather than just reverting. Thanks Guinnog 22:24, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
Since you contributed to the RfC, you might be interested to hear I've opened a RfAr on Rms, which can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration. Feel free to contribute. Thanks! Demiurge 16:02, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
My addition to this article was based on a paragraph found on another wikipedia page (possibly Crown Jewels of Ireland or Michael collins?). A quick google search did turn up a number of mentions, hidden amongst wikipedia and derivitive links, but no solid confirmation. GreatGodOm 14:37, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Hello! I noticed that you have been a contributor to articles on Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion. You may be interested in checking out a new WikiProject - WikiProject Anglicanism. Please consider signing up and participating in this collaborative effort to improve and expand Anglican-related articles! Cheers! Fishhead64 23:32, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
see IRISH MY ERSE
provoked by Kevin Myers, D'Olier Street's Worstwhile Direst.
See new blog IRISH MY ERSE
Hi Ryano. That's sound then. El Gringo 12:42, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Delete it. I cant find anything. All I know that he was staunchly opposed to Home Rule and Irish Republicanism. Thanks for looking at the article.
A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee. It doesn't list you as a party, but you may wish to add yourself. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Northern Ireland and, if you wish, add you name and indicate that you agree to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 18:20, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:14, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Ryano. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Ryano. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Wikiwand in your browser!
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.
