User talk:Fergananim/ArchieveXIV

O'Neills etc.

Just a friendly word of advice - if your going to make additions to articles, add a citation otherwise you are adding original research into the articles. I notice you have made quite a few such edits, all of which can be challenged. Also helps to check the grammer, as in at least one article you made it awkward to read. Mabuska ^(talk) 11:12, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up, Mabuska. Will add the relevant links as soon as possible. Feel free to correct my grammer too! Fergananim (talk) 19:05, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, will do when I get time to take a more thorough check. It does really help improve articles when additions are sourced as then people can find out who and where the information came from allowing it to be easier to be verified. Mabuska ^(talk) 13:41, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Gillabhrenainn Ua hAnradhain

A tag has been placed on Gillabhrenainn Ua hAnradhain requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Retartist (talk) 04:04, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited History of Roman Catholicism in Ireland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stuart (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is this relevant?

Is the huge talk page at Talk:Richard Óge Martyn relevant to the main page. If not, I think that it should be deleted. Snowman (talk) 18:51, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is against policy to use a talk page in this way so I moved the wall of text to a more suitable testing place. I hope you don't mind Fergananim that I took the liberty of creating a sandbox in your user name User_talk:Fergananim/Sandbox where you can work away on it. Mabuska ^(talk) 11:40, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

O'Shaughnessey's

I've recently come across Roger O'Shaughnessey, Roger Gilla Dubh Ó Seachnasaigh, Dermott Ó Seachnasaigh and other assorted articles which where created by you. Due to the lack of any real information on them or anything that makes notable enough for their own article I suggest that these articles all be merged into a single article called O'Shaughnessey family pr Ó Seachnasaigh family or something. Mabuska ^(talk) 17:00, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In fact merging them into this article you created: Cenél Áeda na hEchtge, would more than suffice. Mabuska ^(talk) 21:15, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Chronology of Irish History to 1976

The article Chronology of Irish History to 1976 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence of WP:NOTABILITY

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Boleyn (talk) 08:44, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Roger O'Shaughness(e)y

Looking at Category:People stubs I found Roger O'Shaughnessey and Roger O'Shaughnessey adjacent, and looking at their articles I'm almost certain they're one man: death dates a year apart, wives of nearly the same name and parentage; forfeited estates on death. I don't know anything about Irish history, but have proposed a merge and am dropping this note on the talk pages of two editors who seem to be Irish specialists and have edited both pages in the past. Over to you. PamD 15:02, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fine by me, work away! Fergananim (talk) 15:30, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Move request on Thomas Keightley (historian)

As past editor to the article, you are encouraged to participate in the discussion at Talk:Thomas Keightley (historian) to rename Thomas Keightley (historian)→Thomas Keightley since requirements of usage and lasting significance under WP:PRIMARYTOPIC appear to be easily met. Also "Thomas Keightley (historian)" would seem to be a misleading label to many nowadays who recognize him as mythology/folklore writer primarily.
The issue at stake is that I find that the notability of Thomas Keightley the writer overwhelms that of the past politician of the same name, and that I don't particularly like "Thomas Keightley (historian)" label since I and others know him primarily as mythographer/folklorist as perhaps you may. I can't claim to have in-depth knowledge on Irish matters, though I often contribute relating to the mythology. --Kiyoweap (talk) 14:39, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Wayne Hennessey

Hi, because the article didn't mention/cite him being of Irish descent. Cheers, Mattythewhite (talk) 15:12, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Burke

What sources do you have to support Burke being of Irish descent? You can't assume someone is of Irish descent just because they have a vaguely Irish name. – Pee Jay 16:20, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm genuinely flabbergasted that you think Burke is a 'vaguely Irish name' ... Fergananim (talk) 16:22, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm genuinely flabbergasted that you think you can add information to an article without a source. – Pee Jay 16:23, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, point taken about sources, but I'm stunned to think you'd need sources to back up surnames as obviously Irish as Burke, Cassidy (surname), Connolly (surname), Flynn, Hennessey, O'Shaughnessy, O'Sullivan, Lynch (surname). Seriously? Fergananim (talk) 16:30, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All information needs sources. Who says that any of the Welsh people you've tagged are of Irish descent? – Pee Jay 16:32, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You ARE actually kidding, right? Where else do you think those surnames originate? Fergananim (talk) 16:35, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter what I think. All that matters is what the sources say, and you don't have any to say that any of those people are of Irish descent, just your own original research. – Pee Jay 16:37, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But I CAN back this up with what the sources say. That's why I included those categories concerning the surnames, above. Fergananim (talk) 16:54, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But you can't prove that any of those specific people are of Irish descent. – Pee Jay 17:17, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fergananim, I'd have to agree that there is an issue with verifiability here. The origins of surnames are often very unclear. Not only that, but you have no evidence that these people's families haven't adopted these surnames randomly at some stage in the past. So, unfortunately, I don't think you can go on surname alone. Deb (talk) 11:30, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the message. However it is wrong to say that "The origins of surnames are often very unclear." Irish surnames are the oldest in Europe, the majority of them having very clear and verified origins. The majority of them were adopted between the 10th and 12th centuries, and the process can be observed in Irish annals. While I could accept that a few of these families may have adopted their surnames randomly, it beggars belief that all of them did, and that none have any Irish connections. Irish surnames are indicative of Irish descent (as opposed to Irish forenames) - should we remove the category from everyone outside of Ireland who claim Irish descent? What about Welsh surnames, or indeed English and Scottish ones? Before I go any further, can you please explain to me your understanding of how surnames were adopted generally, and the process in Ireland? I am rather gob-smacked at what you say, but again I'm willing to discuss it. Cheers, Fergananim (talk) 15:46, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ó hAonghusa, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hennessey (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:03, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

January 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Germyn Lynch may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

[[Category:Irish merchants]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:51, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I didn't notice that! Done, Fergananim (talk) 00:53, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

February 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Martin McGuinness may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

*[http://vixenswithconvictions.com/2014/02/20/exclusive-was-martin-mcguinness-the-head-of-the-iras-

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:04, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of John Conneely for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John Conneely is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Conneely until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 04:02, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Frank Hand (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Irishtown, Donnybrook and IRA

Heidi Hazell (IRA murder victim) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Muenster, Kalashnikov and IRA

John Joe McGee (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to IRA, PIRA and Special Boat Squadron

Caroline Moreland (IRA murder victim) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to West Belfast and IRA ceasefire

Catherine Dunne (IRA murder victim) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to RUC and IRA

Robert J. Glover (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to UDR and IRA

Murders of Catherine and Gerard Mahon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to RUC

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:52, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Irish Roman Catholics category

Hi there,

The Category:Irish Roman Catholics category is for "Members of the Roman Catholic Church, either past or present for whom their membership was or is a defining characteristic or related to their notability and where the person has self-identified as a Roman Catholic". (My emphasis added). As such, it shouldn't be added by default to articles about murder victims. Regards, Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 15:06, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. Ooops. Thanks! Fergananim (talk) 02:04, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Murder of Margaret Perry (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to RUC, Peter Taylor, IRA and Gordon Kerr

Ireland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to English, Welsh and Scots

James Greer (sectarian murder victim) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to UDA and IRA

John McAnulty (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to RUC and IRA

Maurice Gilvarry (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to UVF and IRA

William J. Staunton (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to IRA and Falls Road

McKenna and Bowen killings (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to UVF

Michael Clerkin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to TD

Patrick Duffy (murder victim) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to IRA

Patrick Joseph Morrissey (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Foreman

Seamus Quaid (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to IRA

Sydney Agnew (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to IRA

Terence Herdman (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to IRA

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:42, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of James Greer (sectarian murder victim)

A tag has been placed on James Greer (sectarian murder victim) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Dmol (talk) 17:20, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Rosaleen Gavin

A tag has been placed on Rosaleen Gavin requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Dmol (talk) 17:23, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of McKenna and Bowen killings for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article McKenna and Bowen killings is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/McKenna and Bowen killings until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.Quis separabit? 18:31, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Kevin Heatley for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kevin Heatley is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kevin Heatley until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Quis separabit? 18:31, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Terence Herdman for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Terence Herdman is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Terence Herdman until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Quis separabit? 18:31, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Edmund Burke (poet) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Edmund Burke (poet) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edmund Burke (poet) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 23:27, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of articles

Hi Fergananim

I've noticed that a few of your articles appear to be being pulled up for a lack of notability.

If you havent seen it before there is guidance available on how to evidence the notability of your articles under WP:NOTE

If the articles are still under design and may meet notability criteria when fully referenced and completed then it may be worth creating them in your sandbox page to prevetn an unnessecary deletion of work in progress

Hope that helps Amortias (T)(C) 21:35, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. The fault is entirely mine, as I've not been as active as times past, and have forgotten some of the criteria. Cheers, Fergananim (talk) 09:27, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Sydney Agnew

A tag has been placed on Sydney Agnew requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Dmol (talk) 06:38, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Gordan Gallagher

A tag has been placed on Gordan Gallagher requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Dmol (talk) 06:40, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Robert J. Glover

A tag has been placed on Robert J. Glover requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Dmol (talk) 06:42, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Robert J. Glover for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Robert J. Glover is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert J. Glover until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Dmol (talk) 22:44, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Murder of Gillian Johnston

A tag has been placed on Murder of Gillian Johnston requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Dmol (talk) 22:46, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Sydney Agnew for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sydney Agnew is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sydney Agnew until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Dmol (talk) 22:51, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Gordan Gallagher for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gordan Gallagher is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gordan Gallagher until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Dmol (talk) 22:56, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Patrick Duffy (murder victim)

A tag has been placed on Patrick Duffy (murder victim) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Dmol (talk) 22:47, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Maurice Gilvarry

A tag has been placed on Maurice Gilvarry requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Dmol (talk) 22:47, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Caroline Moreland (IRA murder victim)

A tag has been placed on Caroline Moreland (IRA murder victim) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Dmol (talk) 22:49, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Caroline Moreland (IRA murder victim) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Caroline Moreland (IRA murder victim) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caroline Moreland (IRA murder victim) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Dmol (talk) 15:55, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Maurice Gilvarry for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Maurice Gilvarry is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maurice Gilvarry until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Dmol (talk) 15:59, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Murder victims

Hi Fergananim. I have often seen your name in article histories and regard you as a valuable contributor to matters of Irish interest in Wikipedia. In the past couple of days, however, I have responded to discussions about two articles you created, recommending that they be deleted. I have just now noticed that you have created quite a few articles about murder victims and, sadly, I believe I will probably nominate more of them for deletion when I have time. I regret doing this to work by an editor I respect. I have come to speak to you to recommend that you create no new articles about murder victims without considering more carefully the question of their notability because I would hate to see further work of yours being challenged and deleted, as I notice has already happened, going by the high number of red links on this talk page. Articles about notable people are very welcome, but I don't like to see a productive and valuable editor wasting energy expended in good faith, and I dislike contributing to your frustration. — O'Dea (talk) 23:12, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you, O'Dea. Usually I don't comment when articles of mine are up for deletion, as obviously its something other editors should judge. As I said elsewhere, its obvious I need to re-read the guidelines (which I've not done in many a year) and abide by them. Much appreciated, Fergananim (talk) 18:01, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Loígis (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to John O'Donovan

Uí Fergusa (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Liffey

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:50, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dammitt, sorry about that! Fergananim (talk) 11:37, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Women writers Invitation

Hello Fergananim/ArchieveXIV! Thank you for your contributions to articles related to Women writers. I'd like to invite you to become a part of WikiProject Women writers, a WikiProject aimed at improving the quality of articles about women writers on Wikipedia.

If you would like to participate, please visit the WikiProject Women writers page for more information. Feel free to sign your name under "Members". I look forward to your involvement!

Speedy deletion nomination of Fedelma Ní Ráighne

A tag has been placed on Fedelma Ní Ráighne requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. cyberdog958^Talk 01:45, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Aed mac Brian Ó hUiginn for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Aed mac Brian Ó hUiginn is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aed mac Brian Ó hUiginn until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. SpinningSpark 19:02, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Eilís Ní Chonnaola

The article Eilís Ní Chonnaola has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of notability. Could also be deleted under the WP:BLPPROD process since the only reference has no mention of the subject.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Pichpich (talk) 03:57, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Events happening in Dublin

Hi! From your name and the articles you've contributed to I'm taking a guess you might be in Ireland so I hope you don't mind me reaching out. We know have a recognised Wikimedia Community Ireland User Group and we have been running workshops and other events in Dublin and beyond. In case you are interested our next event will be this Saturday in Collins Barracks, you can find the details here. Smirkybec (talk) 18:18, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Presentation proposal for Wikimania 2015

How to pick up more women...

Hello to the members of WikiProject Women writers! Victuallers and I have developed a proposal for a talk to be presented at Wikimania 2015. It's titled, How to pick up more women -- as in more women editors and more women's biographies. The proposal review process has begun and there's no guarantee that this proposal will be accepted. That's where you come in. Please review our proposal and give us feedback. Ultimately, we hope you add your name to the signup at the bottom of the proposal which signifies you're interested in the talk (it does not signify you'll be attending the event). Thank you! Rosiestep (talk) 21:55, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Devon

added a link pointing to Britons

Dumnonii

added a link pointing to Brythonic

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:30, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of article you created

Murder of Andrew Burns is being considered for deletion. It really could use more detail, sourcing, links. Best.E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:13, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Pól ó Griofa

The article Pól ó Griofa has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced BLP of a unotable person

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Wgolf (talk) 03:45, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Fedelma Ní Ráighne for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Fedelma Ní Ráighne is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fedelma Ní Ráighne until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. The Banner talk 19:06, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tomás Ó Con Cheanainn, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page BA. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:54, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

August 2015

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Dál Riata may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

[Category:Gaelic-Irish nations and dynasties]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:57, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 22:16, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Seán Duffy

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Seán Duffy, and it appears to include material copied directly from https://www.tcd.ie/CISS/staff/duffy.php.

It is possible that the bot was mistaken and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 11:46, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Shane Keena

The article Shane Keena has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable musician, fails WP:NMUSICBIO.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Tavix ^(talk) 03:38, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Barbara Naughton

A tag has been placed on Barbara Naughton requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Ches (talk) 16:48, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Barbara Naughton

The article Barbara Naughton has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Does not appear to meet GNG or NAUTHOR

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. John from Idegon (talk) 19:09, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Britain and Ireland

Thanks for your message. Of course the Irish are a distinct people. I wasn't questioning that. But at some time they were not a unified people populating what became 'Ireland'. Because of the controversies in this article I am merely asking for you to provide a source about the statement that the 'Irish' as a distinct group populated the islands along with the Anglo Saxons (and many other tribes or peoples) during this period. My understanding is that what became to be called the 'Irish' people were already present in Ireland prior to the Roman occupation of 'England' and therefore prior to the various migrations of people after the Romans left. It will help prevent others reverting your edits if you provide sources when editing controversial articles. It is probably better to take any further discussion or reasons for your edits to the articles talk page rather than each of ours. Robynthehode (talk) 21:07, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Terminology of the British Isles, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Brythonic. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:10, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Knights of the Red Branch Inc, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michael Burke. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:35, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

James Lawlor Kiernan

added links pointing to Congestion and Bull Run

Knights of the Red Branch Inc

added links pointing to MLA and DUP

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:46, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ó Brádaigh, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gaelic. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Diarmait Mac Murchada, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kavanagh. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Celtic edits

You seem on a campaign to change most uses of "Celtic" to "Irish". Sure, "Celtic" is a notoriously unsatisfactory term, whose meaning tends to dissolve when inspected closely, but if it just meant "Irish", then academic sources would not still find it useful and necessary to use it. From some of your changes, you don't seem very familiar with parts of the subject area, so I suggest going cautiously, if at all. Johnbod (talk) 14:01, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If at all possible I leave Celtic alone when appropriate, as it certainly does have very valid and deeply useful applications. However, too many times it is used instead of 'Gaelic-Irish', 'Irish', 'the Irish langauge' et al. I don't understand this, especially as we should try to use terms correctly on Wikipedia. Its primary correct use in modern times is as a linguistic definition; it has none on matters of ethnicity, nationality, religeon, race, art - except of course in popular use which as ever is wildly incorrect. 14:21, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

There is extensive academic literature on what "Celtic" can or should mean in a variety of contexts. There is a need for some term, and this very unsatisfactory one has taken the slot. Certainly its use for ethnicity is beating a slow retreat, but it remains an entirely viable term in art history and many other cultural fields. Your edits are POV and OR and mostly inappropriate. Since there is usually a Welsh, Scottish, and even English dimension in these areas, just substituting "Irish" won't do at all. You are also changing referenced text to say something different from what the (unchanged) references say. Johnbod (talk) 14:30, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just to add in the occasional tendency to remove sourced information without apparently reading it and stating that the sourced statement is based on incorrect assumptions without providing evidence to back up such claims. Mabuska ^(talk) 15:36, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Soured material is not always correct. The only correct use of the term Celtic is as a linguistic defintion. Every other application you may see - ethnic, national, art, cultural, muscial, DNA - are all wrong. Fergananim (talk) 17:06, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate that Wikipedia is open to editing by anyone, but the problem with that means that quite a few rely on popular sources that do not always use terms correctly, or indeed themselves only understand its popular stereotypical uses. This problem is made worse by the fact that most of those who edit it rely on Anglocentric material, which continue to be based on 19th century ideas ("The real problem with “Anglo-Saxon” and “Celtic” is with the labels themselves - holdovers from the racial imperialism of the nineteenth-century” - Michael Newton's review of James P. Cantrell's "How Celtic Culture Invented Southern Literature", e-Keltoi 1, 2006, 2006, p. 11). When I have the time, I will re-edit some - only some - of the reverted material and try to make the use of terms more understandable (for example, noting that Dougall/Dugald is "Scots-Gaelic" instead of "Celtic"; the former being the language the forename is derived from, the latter being not a language but the term for a group of modern languages, with no ethnic application whatsoever). Likewise, if the term 'Celtic' is applied in an ethnic sense then I will remove it and replace it with the names of the actual ethnic groups concerned, be they Irish or British. In science it matters very much to know what terms mean and how they may be applied. Why not in history? Fergananim (talk) 18:00, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clan Donald reversion

In answer to your points raised. You are going to have to find a source to back up the information you want in the articles.QuintusPetillius (talk) 17:12, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For the now obselete term, 'the British Isles', see Norman Davis's "Vanished Kingdoms", 2011, p. 42, and "The Isles: A History", 1999, p. xxii (Quote: "the Isles' became British by monarchical criteria in 1603 and constitutionally in 1801. They ceased to be British in 1949 [2011] … though few in the British residue have yet cared to notice.”[1999]). For the only correct use of the term Celtic, see “Redefining the Celts”, by John Collis, in Kelten am Rhein: Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Congress of Celtic Studies, 23-27 July 2007, Bonn: Part 2, Philologie: sprachen un Literaturen, 2010, pp. 33-43(Quote from page 35:"It is essential that we do not transfer the definition in the modern world ... to the ancient world as it causes considerable confusion in our attempts to interpret what was going on - in the Classical world Celtic was an ethnic concept, and possibly in some cases geographical or administrative (e.g., the Roman name of the province). When ancient authors use the term celtice, they are referring to the language spoken by ethnic Celts, not a language belonging to the Celtic language group as we do today.”). If you could add these for me I would be much obliged. Is mise, Fergananim (talk) 17:20, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Celtic Rite, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Britain. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:51, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cormac mac Airt, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Britain. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:05, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

More "Celtic" edits

Hi Fergananim, I've now reverted several of your changes to articles removing the term "Celtic". I see above that this issue has been brought up with you before. You're absolutely correct that the term is problematic and in many cases can be easily replaced with something else. However, there are still cases where it remains the conventional term and there isn't a better replacement. In the context of Celtic Christianity, there's a lot of nonsense floating around out there, but that won't be resolved by simply changing the terms. This is especially so when incorrect terms are substituted, as you've done in several places. For instance, "Celtic" can't be replaced with "Irish", let alone "Irish and English" when talking about the Easter dating, monastic tonsure, etc. "Celtic" remains the conventional term in these instances, even though "Celticity" has little to do with the correspondences between Irish and British use. Similarly, on Celtic harp, you've made a number of edits that appear to be contradictory and incorrect. Please try to be more careful with these edits.--Cúchullain ^t/c 18:56, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, which is why I have gone to some trouble to be careful with these recent edits. I used the terms Irish in place of Celtic in an ethnic sense, while I used Irish and English to reflect the fact that many English did in fact adopt these Irish practises because they became Christian via the Irish. I AM been careful, so please ask before you do any more reverts such as you did with Celtic harp. In fact, I'll turn the tables around - seeing as you are the one who did the reverts, please explain to me when and where use of the terms 'Celtic' or 'Celt' is apprropriate. Otherwise I won't understand the basis of even your reverts. Is mise, Fergananim (talk) 19:01, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

When you get reverted, as you have been a fair bit lately, the best next step is to go to the talk page to hash it out. I explained the issue at Celtic harp, and several others have at Wilfrid. I can leave similar comments at Celtic Christianity and elsewhere. The main issue is that your changes seem a bit haphazard. As I say, "Celtic" is still in wide use to refer to the common traits of early medieval Irish and Brittonic Christianity. The ethnic or national terms simply aren't adequate replacements as they don't cover the entire topic. Additionally, when modern revivalists use "Celtic", it similarly can't be replaced in a lot of cases. For instance, in my edits here, Ian Bradley isn't talking about language when he says most practitioners aren't "Celtic". He means that they're typically English people with no close connection to the "Celtic countries".--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:12, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

But as the scholarly parts of those articles and their sources make clear, just because a term "is in wide use" does not make it correct. My changes are not haphazard, they are based on knowledge. If you asked why I did such and such change I could explain - for example in the heading I placed the two terms from Gaelic together, as I did with the two Brythonic terms. That at least makes good linguistic and historic sense, whereas the original and reverted use mix them together carelessly. Likewise when noting that "Celtic harp" is an English term mainly used in the USA - the original Gaelic and Brythonic terms mentioned in the article demonstrate this. The latter point also shows there is no common Celtic term for them, so even on that point use of the term Celtic falls. Likewise I can explain each and all the reverts I did at Wilfrid and Celtic Christianity, and have tried very briefly to do so in edit summaries. Fergananim (talk) 19:35, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the evidence that the phrase "Celtic harp" is mainly used in the USA? Is there evidence beyond general changes in language that the harp had different names before the mid-19th century?--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:44, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Where else do you hear it used? It is not used here in Ireland - or Britain - and all the article websites calling it that are all in the USA. Almost none of the Irish sources mention the term at all. Generally, 'Celtic' is a term Americans use when they really mean Irish; its something they picked up from the English, who first used the term to denote any or all things Irish. But it has no provenence in Irish sources - becuase its not a word the Irish (or the Scots, Welsh, or Bretons) used. That's why its important to note actual terms from the cultures concerned, not English or American popular terms. Fergananim (talk) 20:06, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm well aware of the history of the term "Celtic". If you want to introduce changes, you need to back them up with sources. I tend to doubt a source will be forthcoming that the term is mostly used in the US, and at any rate, article has much bigger problems than that; as I say, it doesn't explain the distinction between the Irish harp and the Welsh harp. That problem isn't going to be solved by going back and forth over what "Celtic" means in other contexts.--Cúchullain ^t/c 20:22, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

" If you want to introduce changes, you need to back them up with sources". I have. Fergananim (talk) 15:24, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Máedóc of Ferns, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gaelic. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:47, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Patrick and Harry Loughnane for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Patrick and Harry Loughnane is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patrick and Harry Loughnane until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Meatsgains (talk) 21:58, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen Lynch

Hello. I came across two articles you created back in 2010, Stephen Lynch fitz Dominick Dubh and Stephen Lynch (mayor). They appear to be about the same person, but details differ. I know nothing of the subject, so I might just be confused. Should these articles be merged? Station1 (talk) 15:15, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, well spotted! Yes please merge - may I suggest as Stephen Lynch fitz Dominick Dubh? Simply because adding his patronymic (attested use) would distinguish him from all other Stephen Lynch's. Would you consider deleting the following articles I created, as I think they are all too minor to merit an article? Ruben of Dairinis, Malsachanus, Fothadh an Fili, Loisin an Fili, Marcus Seoige, Jerome Alley, Adrian James Martyn, Tomás Laighléis, Seán Mac Brádaigh, Laurentius of Echternach. Cheers, Fergananim (talk) 20:17, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Merged as suggested. However, the two Civic Offices templates are in conflict and I have no way of sorting that out, so you might want to take a look when you have time. I left both in the article temporarily. As to deletions, I'm not an admin, so I'm afraid I have no special powers in that regard. Station1 (talk) 05:10, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Hmm, the reason is because he was Mayor on more than one occasion and that seemed the best way to reflect that. Might have to revisit it at some point. Remind me how to contact an admin. Fergananim (talk) 13:50, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - I don't usually contact admins, but I found Wikipedia:Requests for administrator attention. Hope that helps. Station1 (talk) 22:49, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Mary Kavanagh

The article Mary Kavanagh has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article does not meet notability requirements for biographies. No sources, nothing on Google.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Rogermx (talk) 18:18, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Brasil Madden for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Brasil Madden is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brasil Madden until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. UserDe (talk) 02:35, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Fergananim. 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.

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Fergananim. 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)[reply]

Reference errors on 26 January

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the First Battle of Athenry page, your edit caused an empty citation error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:18, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Adrian James Martyn for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Adrian James Martyn is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adrian James Martyn until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Fyddlestix (talk) 18:14, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Billy Kedian for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Billy Kedian is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Billy Kedian until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:45, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Selblaith

The article Selblaith has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This is not a notable name per WP:APONOTE because there aren't at least two notable people with the name, or is otherwise notable per WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:12, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Irish slaves myth AfD

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Irish slaves myth is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Irish slaves myth until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 10:18, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Mulatto Jack for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mulatto Jack is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mulatto Jack until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Fyddlestix (talk) 22:38, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]