| Revision as of 01:19, 12 July 2006 edit24.166.6.153 (talk)No edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 08:46, 12 July 2006 edit undoDamac (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers11,899 edits signing unsignedNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| The spelling here should be Ó Chonaill. | The spelling here should be Ó Chonaill.{{Unsigned|Donnchadh}} | ||
| On what basis, Donnchadh? I don't know what (if any) fluency in Irish you have, but male surnames do not aspirate (take a "h"). That's elementary. --] 13:48, 3 July 2006 (UTC) | On what basis, Donnchadh? I don't know what (if any) fluency in Irish you have, but male surnames do not aspirate (take a "h"). That's elementary. --] 13:48, 3 July 2006 (UTC) | ||
| For what it's worth, Republican literature used the spelling without the "h". He tended to use O'Connell, rather than the Irish form. | For what it's worth, Republican literature used the spelling without the "h". He tended to use O'Connell, rather than the Irish form.{{Unsigned|24.166.6.153}} | ||
Revision as of 08:46, 12 July 2006
The spelling here should be Ó Chonaill.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Donnchadh (talk • contribs)
On what basis, Donnchadh? I don't know what (if any) fluency in Irish you have, but male surnames do not aspirate (take a "h"). That's elementary. --Damac 13:48, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
For what it's worth, Republican literature used the spelling without the "h". He tended to use O'Connell, rather than the Irish form.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.166.6.153 (talk • contribs)