| Revision as of 00:20, 27 May 2018 editLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,298,789 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Talk:Michael Collins (Irish leader)/Archive 3) (bot← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 23:23, 29 November 2024 edit undoJohn Not Real Name (talk | contribs)103 edits →"Death" or "Assassination"? |
| (56 intermediate revisions by 23 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
{{talkheader}} |
|
{{Vital article|level=4|topic=People|class=B}} |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|vital=yes|living=no|listas=Collins, Michael|1= |
|
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= |
|
|
{{WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom|class=B|auto=inherit|importance=}} |
|
{{WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom|importance=Mid}} |
|
{{WikiProject Irish Republicanism|class=B|importance=top}} |
|
{{WikiProject Ireland|importance=high}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Biography|military-work-group=y|military-priority=Low|politician-work-group=y|politician-priority=Mid}} |
|
{{WikiProject Ireland|class= B|importance= high}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Biography |living=no |class=B |
|
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=Mid}} |
|
|politician-work-group=yes |politician-priority=mid |
|
|
|listas=Collins, Michael}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Politics|class=B|importance=mid}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Military history |
|
{{WikiProject Military history |
|
|class=start |
|
|class =B |
|
|
|b1 <!-- Referencing and citations --> =n |
|
|B-Class-1=no |
|
|
|
|b2 <!-- Coverage and accuracy --> =y |
|
<!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |
|
|
|
|b3 <!-- Structure --> =y |
|
|B-Class-2=yes |
|
|
|
|b4 <!-- Grammar and style --> =y |
|
<!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |
|
|
|
|b5 <!-- Supporting materials --> =y |
|
|B-Class-3=yes |
|
|
|
|Biography =y |
|
<!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |
|
|
|
|British =y |
|
|B-Class-4=yes |
|
|
|
|WWI =y}} |
|
<!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Northern Ireland|importance=Low}} |
|
|B-Class-5=yes |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Gaelic games|importance=Low}} |
|
|British=yes |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Irish republicanism|importance=top}} |
|
|Biography=yes |
|
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
{{WikiProject Northern Ireland|class=C|auto=inherit}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Gaelic games|class=}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
{{Troubles restriction}} |
|
{{Troubles restriction}} |
|
|
|
|
| Line 45: |
Line 38: |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Suggestion to Editors of This Page == |
|
== Irish name == |
|
|
<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #EDEAFF; padding: 0px 10px 0px 10px; border: 1px solid #8779DD;">{{Quote box |
|
|
| title = |
|
|
| title_bg = #C3C3C3 |
|
|
| title_fnt = #000 |
|
|
| quote = The initial spelling issue was rapidly resolved. Thereafter ... well, it seems that someone was having a bad day, and it all went downhill. Any further concerns about the article can be raised in a new discussion when the dust has settled, and everyone refocuses on ], ], ], ] etc. --] <small>] • (])</small> 11:52, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
| width = 30%|halign=left}} |
|
|
:''The following discussion is closed. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.''<!-- from Template:Archive top--> |
|
|
---- |
|
|
Collins's Irish name {{lang|ga|Mícheál}} has been incorrectly spelled as {{lang|ga|Míceál}} since December, sourced to a 2010 story in the ''Irish Times''. I corrected it yesterday, with a ref to Meda Ryan's ''Michael Collins and the Women Who Spied for Ireland''. I hope users will agree that ] would rate a book by an acknowledged expert on the subject above an article by a couple of journalists with no known expertise. At the same time, I removed a ref sourcing the fact that Collins's middle name was not James, for the good and simple reason that there is no mention of a middle name anywhere in the article. My edit was by {{U|Squatch347}} with the edit summary, "User removed description of Collins. Please discuss proposed changes on the Talk Page given this page's inclusion in remediation {{sic}} protection". So now I'm discussing it here. Please state what "description" was removed, or why my edit was otherwise wrong.<br/> |
|
|
<small>tl;dr addition: The ''Irish Times'' story concerned a 1922 document, which was probably signed "{{lang|ga|Míċeál Ó Coileáin}}", which is nowadays rendered as {{lang|ga|Mícheál}}. The ] states that the dot should be replaced with a "h".</small> ] (]) 12:40, 24 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, nothin wrong with what ya did.] (]) 12:59, 24 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
:Yes agree with changes. ] (]) 16:27, 24 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::Thanks for reverting. Now I don't have to worry about "remediation protection", even though it's over 24 hours since my previous revert. ] (]) 16:35, 24 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
: I changed the spelling in December as there was no h in the source that was present at that time. Your source is superior, thanks. ] (]) 20:31, 24 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
::For a change that fundamental, at least a few sources should have been cross-checked beforehand. This is why competence matters. ] (]) 20:56, 24 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
::: Is such a comment necessary or in any way productive? You are implying I am incompetent because I conformed the spelling to the source present at the time? Incompetence is citing the ch spelling to a source which contradicted it. In any case, you are free to add to the article if you wish; the article would benefit from your competence in these matters. ] (]) 22:25, 24 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Its a statement of fact. A significant political figure, and you, wading in, obviously lacking in pre knowledge, changed the spelling of his native name based on a single 1922 newspaper source. All I am saying is that "at least a few sources should have been cross-checked beforehand", either you consider that diligence or not. Note all the fuss created here now as a result; please be more careful. ] (]) 22:58, 24 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::I think what {{U|Hrodvarsson}} did was absolutely right. The guideline says ], not "cross-check a few sources before doing anything as major as correcting an apparent spelling error based on the pre-existing cited source." <s>"All the fuss here" was not created by that edit, but by someone else's knee-jerk revert when I fixed it.</s> I think an apology might be in order. ] (]) 23:21, 24 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::I dont think so. Being bold shouldn't mean dragging up decades old newspaper sources to make fundamental changes to the native names of historically significant figures. You may have different standards, both wrt reliable sources and as to how we treat drive by people under misunderstanding. Your actions here, playing both sides, are most hypocritical. ] (]) 23:33, 24 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::Firstly, Hrodvarsson didn't "drag up" anything. The source (less than a decade old) was ''already there''. It was there as a citation for {{lang|ga|Mícheál Ó Coileáin}}, but in fact it didn't say {{lang|ga|Mícheál Ó Coileáin}}, it said {{lang|ga|Míceál Ó Coileáin}}. Secondly, a one-letter edit is not a "fundamental change". If it was so fundamental, why did it take three months for anybody to notice? If it was that fundemental, why didn't ''you'' find a proper source for the correct spelling of his name years ago? Finally, I am not "playing both sides" – I was never on your side and I never had any problem with Hrodvarsson. In fact, I commend Hrodvarsson (and I "thanked" him), for bothering to explain his edit, while on the other hand I found your attitude very unpleasant. Just saying "I agree" in answer to my post does not entitle you to take the moral high ground and lecture somebody on how to edit – especially when what you say goes directly against Misplaced Pages guidelines. Are we to rename WP:BOLD as WP:Drive-by and say it is disruptive? I take back what I said earlier; it is not the person who reverted me, it is ''you'' that have created all the fuss. ] (]) 00:02, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::Wow, but fine, I have the measure of you now least there was any doubt before. I earlier took you on the strength of argument, seems I was wrong and an unfocused belligerence was more at play. Water under the bridge man. ] (]) 00:07, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::The belligerence was all on your part. It was a civilised discussion before you went off half-cocked. ] (]) 00:10, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
:Ha ha, you are were looking for reassurance and validation, having come off badly as you often do on many other articles. So tell the rest to somebody that cant see through such transparent behavior. "half-cocked", yawn, some self reflection please, maybe also read "wp:comptence". ] (]) 00:13, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::Have read through the article and edited; dear god help us all if you and Hrodvarsson are setting the standard of what wiki is capable of. It's frankly, terrible, barely connected to reality, going half cocked in several directions with scant regard to historical record, or in places, achievable human ability; swiftly claiming the British were right all along (with no evidence), or no hang on the Irish are somehow gods c. Scolaire you are giving the impression of - its all under control, I have this, but from a scan of the article, and digging into your claims of authority, could not be less impressed. I am leaving this self reinforcing disaster. ] (]) 01:38, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::God! Come down off your high horse, will you? It wasn't me ''or'' Hrodvarsson who wrote this article. Out of 4,500 edits, , nearly all of them removing crap, and , mostly minor but some of them adding useful content. Yes, the article was terrible – that's why I never attempted a major edit. We could hardly be said to be "setting the standard", and I most certainly neither said nor suggested that it was "all under control", that I "had" it, or that I had any "claim to authority". And yes, your edits of last night improved it some, and you are to be thanked for that, but "copy-edits" that introduce words like (later changed to ) and – I'm not impressed. Taking out "The Collins family were part of an ancient clan" with an edit summary of , but leaving in the equally ridiculous and equally unsourced "for the 20th century, the long hidden Ó Coileáin clan of Uí Conaill Gabhra, once the most dominant sept of the Uí Fidgenti, produced Michael Collins, or Mícheál Ó Coileáin" – not impressed. But worst, for somebody that lectured another editor on the need for "at least a few sources to be cross-checked beforehand", you didn't add one single source in your 31 edits, either for what was already there or for what you added. Sure, ], but that includes not looking at ]. Happy editing. ] (]) 10:23, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
::::See below Scolaire. The more I look, the less I am impressed, blatant POV, blatent copyvio, blatent sock puppeting, etc etc. We seem to have different views of article integrity, certainly "high horse" stuff, certainly worthy of wider investigation. ] (]) 10:30, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::::This has nothing to do with the guy below. You are accusing me and Hrodvarsson of blatant POV etc etc. on the basis that if we made a few edits, we must be the vandals and the trolls, have low standards and a warped view of article integrity. Your personal attacks on me are becoming more and more unacceptable. If you continue this will be going to ANI. ] (]) 10:37, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
:I have already escalated. <s>If you now suddenly have such low involvement, why have you been so shrill and hysterical on this talk. Because you have not put in real investment or due dillegince, flitter about with unfounded opinions just so you can be heard, and lack character and are just that way? Might make sense. Nonetheless, there is a major issue with this article, no matter what ye say, and it needs eyes.</s> ] (]) 10:45, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
---- |
|
|
: ''The discussion above is closed. <b style="color: #FF0000;">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.''<!-- from ] --></div><div style="clear:both;"></div> |
|
|
|
|
|
== Mass deletions of sourced information == |
|
|
|
|
|
User:Ceoil has removed a lot of sourced information from the article in what perhaps appears to be a drunken tirade. I do not see any reason not to include this so I have readded it.] (]) 09:52, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
:Apart from being loaded and hardly based on cold historical assessment, terms such as "spirit of self-sacrifice", "Intensely hard-working", "His personal warmth and charm", which you restored, indicate a romantic flowery view, very dated, not at all today's language, and as such indicate a major copyvio problem with the article, and it should probably be opened for wider investigation. My impression so far today of it and its gaurdians; walled garden. ] (]) 10:02, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
::It is sourced using reliable sources. Misplaced Pages should report what reliable sources report. Who are you to decide if it is based on "cold historical assessment"?] (]) 10:05, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Reliable sources cherry picked from about 1930? No you miss the point. Also, there is evident close copying going on, which seeps through in the dated language employed here. Sorry, but those are the fact. ] (]) 10:09, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
::::How do you know they are cherry picked? That's a weird assumption to make. I had a look at the sources and they are from 1980, 2003 and 1990, not 1930. If you have a reliable source that contradicts the information you have deleted please present it.] (]) 10:15, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::I've challenged you on specific claims. Its not for me to prove a negative and find sources that say Collins was not "intensely hard-working" etc; the burden is on you to (a) defend this as a general historical consensus (b) prove that its not whole scale copyvio, not a cut and paste job from a rather dated web source. Until either of these are satisfied, I'll be reverting. Also, (c) please have the stones and integrity to use your regular username here, rather than hide behind an ip. We have the wiki-blame tool, remember. ] (]) 10:21, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::You are the one who made the assertion that the sources were cherry picked. Back up that assertion.] (]) 10:28, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::No, thats not how wiki works; the burden of proof is on you. I'm one inch from opening a major investigation on Scolaire, who probably should be blocked, given what a surface skim has revealed here re his approach to adding "content". <S>I'm assuming the IP is you Scolaire based on DUCK, as ye have woken up at the same time, use similar <hear no evil> language, and your first response was also to discredit the messenger, in very similar word patterns.</s> ] (]) 10:35, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::::Please see ] ] (]) 10:38, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Looking at these segments - the first and second segments come across as grossly floury and not of encyclopedic tone at all. The third and fourth segments are also...effusive...and could be written in a more NPOV tone, that is, if they need to be there at all. ] (] '''·''' ]) 12:03, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Items of contention== |
|
|
Okay folks - need to get consensus on these segments. I request that {{u|BrownHairedGirl}} please fully lock the article until we resolve this. And invite wider opinion. ] (] '''·''' ]) 12:36, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
:::{{yo|Casliber}} if you want the page protected, please ask at ]. --] <small>] • (])</small> 12:43, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Also, the page is under sanctions and the IP has just made two reverts to Ceoil's one revert...and you're the admin watching it..you gonna look at that then? ] (] '''·''' ]) 12:45, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
{{u|80.111.164.98}} you are already aware this page is under 1RR sanctions. Stop edit warring. ]<sup>]</sup> 12:54, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
*'''Support''' {{U|Ceoil}}'s edits in their entirety. Everything that he removed was unencyclopaedic. I do not believe that the IP is interested in improving the quality of the article. ] (]) 13:12, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Not surprisingly, 80.111.164.98 has been proven to be an ] editor. ] (]) 13:34, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Now blocked, so I don't think any further discussion is needed. ] (]) 13:39, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I'd like to reopen some of the discussion of Ceoil's edits. Quite a few of the changes are excellent and have updated the language to a more NPOV. A few though do seem to be unwarranted. Below is a summary of the edits I think should be discussed, the rest of his edits I support as well. |
|
|
|
|
|
This is an edit that I believe both Ceoil and Scolaire have put forward, though I could be mistaken on the latter. It alters the meaning of the text here (Scolaire fully removes it) to imply that Collins himself is described at brainy, rather than that he "comes from a brainy family." This reference is sourced (though the source needs to be updated to page 106) and is warranted, imo, for a biographical entry. Family origin and characteristics cited by British intelligence officials would seem an apt addition to understanding the background and life of he individual. |
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure why this was removed. "WTF" doesn't give us much to go on for rationale. Tim Pat Coogan uses the same language in his biography on page 6, so I'm not sure there is a warranted rationale for removing it. I'm open to a more detailed defense though. |
|
|
|
|
|
This edit removes an entire paragraph with no accompanying explanation. That paragraph is also sourced and verified in TPC's biography as well. I'm curious as to the reason it was removed. |
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure this is editorializing, it was an expressed policy of the IRB to drive out the RIC so it could establish its own institutions. |
|
|
|
|
|
I initially thought this paragraph should be included, but reworded, but doing a bit more research I can't find where the source, Chrissy Osborne satisfies . She appears to be a podcaster without any formal training. Fully support this paragraph's removal. |
|
|
|
|
|
How is this section specious? His plans definitely seem to have been put on place by the civil war, and it is relevant to the flow of the article as it detracts from efforts to nullify the border commission. |
|
|
|
|
|
Agree with this initial removal as it was an uncited section. However, it is present in Coogan's work on pgs 372-377. Given that proper citation, this section should probably be restored. |
|
|
|
|
|
I'm curious why you removed the section on plenipotentiaries? |
|
|
|
|
|
The first section's removal seems unwarranted, it is a sourced description of his behavior during the negotiations. Fully support the second removal for the same reason as above, overly hero-worship language and likely not a valid source. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 15:51, 25 March 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
|
|
|
:I'm going to comment on the content on its merits. Just having a citation is not enough to include something: |
|
|
#I've taken out the "brainy" sentence altogether. Regardless of whether it was him or his family, a comment by the British secret service (which secret service?) describing him/them as "brainy" is not sufficiently relevant. |
|
|
#Again, a claim that he came from an ancient clan, whether or not Tim Pat said it, is unencyclopaedic. You won't find it in any other biography of Collins (by the way, the edit summary was "pff", not "wtf"). |
|
|
#Same again. His father's death-bed prophesies belong in hagiographies, not encyclopaedia articles. |
|
|
#"In turn, though, the retreat of the RIC drove the British towards more radical and violent responses" does sound like editorialising to me. I'm not bothered one way or another about the paragraph generally, though. Maybe a more straightforward text could be re-added (though a citation would be good). |
|
|
#Since you support removal, there's no need to comment. |
|
|
#There is no 6. |
|
|
#Yeah, " put Collins's plans for the north on hold; he was killed before he could pursue them any further" looks rather like a secondary school essay. Not needed. |
|
|
#A bit problematical, because you linked to the current article, not a diff. Did you mean If so, I would support some well-researched discussion of Collins's involvement or not in the assassination, but not the restoration of the paragraph as it was. |
|
|
#I would agree with adding back the "plenipotentiary" paragraph. |
|
|
#I can't see anything about his behaviour during the negotiations in . It's in the "Personal life" section. Did you mean to link to something else? |
|
|
:Hope this helps. ] (]) 18:18, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
::Indeed it does, and that is very clear rational, and it seems I owe you something of an apology. Sorry, you evidently know the sources are far from taking the approach from that the IP was agitating from. I was taking it from all sides this morning, though thats not good enough. ] (]) 20:21, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::First, I am still not an expert in wikipedia linking, so I might well have screwed up some of the edit links, apologies for where that has caused some frustration. |
|
|
|
|
|
::1) The reference to his family being brainy as written in British intelligence files I thought was an interesting insight into both the level of British intelligence collection at the time and as a good foreshadowing of his importance and success later. The page reference is 106 in Coogan's work, and he has a primary source citation as well. Agree with not taking him as gospel, though I think in this case it might be worth inclusion given the original citation. |
|
|
|
|
|
::2) Ah you're right, the wtf comment was related to the first edit I was referencing, not the second. Great catch, thank you. I think the addition of the family information presents an excellent picture of the family's perception of themselves, and frames how Collins interprets his own place in Irish history as he is growing up. It ties in exceptionally well with the views others had of him while in London, his brash arrogance and willingness to overreact to any perceived slight. Though, if the concern is that we are turning an encyclopedic entry into a biography in that sense, I sympathize there. Perhaps a much, much shorter version of that paragraph (one sentence or so) leading into the next paragraph would be more appropriate? |
|
|
|
|
|
::3) Fair point, it also does seem out of place now that I read it within the updated context. Agreed. |
|
|
|
|
|
::4) The word "radical" certainly doesn't fit. The British escalation of violence in response to RIC failures should be easily supported. Perhaps something like, "In the early 20th century this permanently armed police force was, in effect, the principal representation of the British state in large parts of rural Munster and Connaught. It was a principle aim of republican forces to establish independent Irish institutions following the eviction of RIC elements in local regions. This aim was countered by more direct and violent British actions in an effort to retain control over these regions." I'll track down a better citation than TPC if this works. Unless that citation directly discusses alienation, the last part should probably go given both of your concerns. |
|
|
|
|
|
::7)I'm not sure I agree, if anything it could be expanded a bit to discuss the decrease in material and financial support flowing north and Collins (and the government in general) focused on internal matters. Without this tie in, the section on Northern Ireland doesn't coherently finish, it ends with volunteers coming south. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One of the paragraphs in the article references Michael Collins' election as a "Teachta Dála" in 1918, although An Dáil Éireann was formed in 1919. Would it not be more suitable to change the statement to "he was elected an MP, later serving as a TD after the forming of the Dáil Éireann on 21 January, 1919" |
|
::8)I did yes, sorry about that. I'd be fine putting it back in as is with an appropriate reference, but if both of you feel (and it seems that way) that it would be better expanded/edited with some additional references, I can take that on and get back to you hopefully soon. |
|
|
|
This is just a suggestiom, I may be wrong which is why I will leave this to any editors and experts on the subject. ] (]) 21:55, 7 May 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
:Good point, thank you. Terminology tweaked to clear this up ] (]) 20:15, 13 June 2023 (UTC) |
|
::9) Unless Ceoil has any objections, I'll add back in a few days. |
|
|
|
== "]" listed at ] == |
|
|
] |
|
|
The redirect <span class="plainlinks"></span> has been listed at ] to determine whether its use and function meets the ]. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at '''{{slink|Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 3#Michael Collins (Irish leader}}''' until a consensus is reached. <!-- Template:RFDNote --> <span style="background-color: #FFCFBF; font-variant: small-caps">] <sub>(''']''' / ''']''')</sub></span> 18:28, 3 March 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== "Death" or "Assassination"? == |
|
::10) The source discusses those attitudes in context of his activities during wartime and negotiations, I didn't add that elaboration in my question. Given that it is describing his interactions with others and personal traits, I think it is warranted in a biographical description of the man. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A recent editor contends that "people killed during military engagements in a war aren't assassinated", I would dispute this, assassination is often a tactic of war and is described as such; see: ] and ], where the killings of military leaders in operations specifically intended to target them in the context of military conflict are described as assassinations. The circumstance of Heydrich's death in particular is rather similar; a high-ranking officer was shot in an ambush while he rode in a vehicle. ] (]) 15:04, 10 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
::Thanks for the reply, |
|
|
::] (]) 20:31, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
:Collins was killed in action. (] (]) 08:31, 20 August 2024 (UTC)) |
|
|
:I am not sure assassination is fair. It was an ambush. An assassination is when the I.R.A. shot Teachta Dálas. In this case there was no plan to just kill him but by accident he happened upon them and they quickly moved to exploit it because they knew he had to return by that route. You could argue it is only an assassination if the person killed is important (During War-Time.). Being pernickety about it, he was a valid target militarily speaking as he was in control of the military. ] (]) 23:21, 29 November 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Northern Ireland == |
|
::The best part Ceoil was that the initial post that prompted all the problems was based on a misunderstanding and error in my attempt to undo an edit made conflicting with his. ] (]) 20:31, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
:::There are more ironies than that at play here Squatch347. Its *very* unfortunate that Scolaire was mistaken for the IP, and his credibility was called into question, thats on me. But am most glad to see the close eyes I was hoping for. ] (]) 20:38, 25 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
::I've edited to address (4), (9) and (10). My views on the other points haven't changed. Let's see what other people have to say. ] (]) 16:05, 26 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
Collins had already ended his support for an IRA offensive in Northern Ireland before his death, and stopped sending weapons there. ] (]) 08:31, 20 August 2024 (UTC) |
|
:::Good edits so far. Agreed on letting people digest a bit, I'll wait maybe a week or so and see if I can come up with language that addresses your concerns on the issues. Thanks. ] (]) 18:53, 26 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::Agree with this approach also. For the record, the removal of dated sources, obviously closely paraphrased; the language seeped through, was a big factor behind my edits. ] (]) 10:33, 31 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:Ok, please correct that with a reference ] (]) 12:03, 21 August 2024 (UTC) |
|
== Death section removal of content and lack of citation == |
|
|
|
::There was this newspaper article, but it seems not to be online now: https://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/why-the-big-fellow-has-little-to-teach-political-parties-in-modern-ireland-2307165.html (] (]) 18:54, 22 August 2024 (UTC)) |
|
|
:I know he had talks with the Northern-Premier and in any case the Irish Civil War (1922-1923) meant that even the Northern Irish Republican Army went South to fight for the Provisional Government. ] (]) 23:18, 29 November 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Middle Name == |
|
Check these series of edits by the same IP: |
|
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Michael_Collins_%28Irish_leader%29&type=revision&diff=803570227&oldid=802815825 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is his middle-name? ] (]) 23:22, 29 November 2024 (UTC) |
|
The Death section was greatly modified without being properly cited - please restore this section back to what it previously was, and remove inflammatory 'conspiracy theory' type suggestions. If it's not cited, looks like it probably breaches rules against original research. ] (]) 20:24, 26 May 2018 (UTC) |
|
One of the paragraphs in the article references Michael Collins' election as a "Teachta Dála" in 1918, although An Dáil Éireann was formed in 1919. Would it not be more suitable to change the statement to "he was elected an MP, later serving as a TD after the forming of the Dáil Éireann on 21 January, 1919"
This is just a suggestiom, I may be wrong which is why I will leave this to any editors and experts on the subject. 85.208.36.24 (talk) 21:55, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
A recent editor contends that "people killed during military engagements in a war aren't assassinated", I would dispute this, assassination is often a tactic of war and is described as such; see: Assassination of Reinhard Heydrich and Dzhokhar Dudayev, where the killings of military leaders in operations specifically intended to target them in the context of military conflict are described as assassinations. The circumstance of Heydrich's death in particular is rather similar; a high-ranking officer was shot in an ambush while he rode in a vehicle. BRMSF (talk) 15:04, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
Collins had already ended his support for an IRA offensive in Northern Ireland before his death, and stopped sending weapons there. ParsleySt1 (talk) 08:31, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale..svg){kind=small}
Referencing and citation: criterion not met
Coverage and accuracy: criterion met.svg)
The redirect Michael Collins (Irish leader has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 3 § Michael Collins (Irish leader until a consensus is reached. Utopes (talk / cont) 18:28, 3 March 2024 (UTC)