Talk:Communist Party of Ireland

message: :Image:Unity 270371r.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 20:13, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Unity 270371r.jpg

message: Snappy, I'm concerned that you're letting differences elsewhere get the better of your judgment. You reverted my last edit in full, giving as your reason "Irish Free State ceased to exist in 1937 so referencing it in 1941 is factually incorrect and sloppy edtiing.". How do you suggest we refer to the state then? The Republic you refer to did not come into being until the end of the decade, which in my view makes your version "factually inaccurate", but to call it "sloppy" would be an insult to sloppiness. You just can't anticipate the future as if it was all predestined! Nor does any of this explain your breaking of fifteen valid links and deletion of a reference to anticommunism in Ireland, among other things which betray more than a little ignorance about Irish history. Please try and put a little more thought into your edits in future. Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 04:58, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The Irish Free State ceased to exist in 1937 with the coming into force of the Constitution of Ireland. Since that date, the county has been, and continues to be called Ireland. Try taking your own advice about putting thought into edits, because referring to a political entity that had ceased to exist several years earlier as existing in 1941, shows little or no thought at all. Snappy (talk) 13:02, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It didn't cease to exist in 1937; rather, it adopted a new constitution and changed its name. Mooretwin (talk) 13:37, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Semantics, from IFS article - The Irish Free State came to an end in 1937, when the citizens voted by referendum to replace the 1922 constitution. It was succeeded by the entirely sovereign modern state of the Republic of Ireland. Anyway, it wasn't around in 1941. Snappy (talk) 13:52, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, yes, the southern state was no longer called the IFS in 1941. But neither did the Republic exist in 1941. Therefore I've edited to refer simply to north and south at that point. Mooretwin (talk) 14:03, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, your edits make it clearer and are factually accurate. Snappy (talk) 14:22, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent. Job done. Mooretwin (talk) 14:24, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Cool. Now Snappy, can you address the other points I raised? Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 04:15, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: What other points? Snappy (talk) 13:05, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The breaking of valid links and the deletion of content referring to Irish anticommunism. Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 20:04, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, is that what you were referring to, I see now. Snappy (talk) 23:20, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Once again, if you're not prepared to defend it I'll assume you've thought better of it. Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 04:10, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Defend what, I was correcting your edits about the Irish Free State in 1941. In fact it took two editors to do it. You could use your time to edit this article instead of whinging about it here. Also, you added this - Many Roman Catholic priests were fervent anti-communists, and right-wing Catholic organisations such as Maria Duce were common., it was unreferenced, uncited, vague and somewhat pov, so whether true or not, its removal was justified. Snappy (talk) 11:25, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That's more like it. And the broken links? Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 20:52, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: More like what? Are you admitting you added unreferenced and unsourced material? If so, please don't do so again. 21:11, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I admit it freely. I don't always have time to look for the sources myself. This is a collaboration, after all. You could try using citation requests if you come across informtion that seems dubious to you. Can I take it you don't have a problem with those articles being linked? Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 22:17, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Add your links back in. You don't have time to find sources, meaning you are too lazy to find them and hope others will clean up after you. Collaboration means everyone doing their best to improve the encyclopaedia, not relying on others to do your work for you. You have a long history of adding unsourced pov to articles; like the Shell to Sea ones, well until you were banned from them. Snappy (talk) 16:57, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't say I don't have time to find sources, I said I don't always have time. I have added sources to other people's material, just as I have seen sources added to text I wrote. I no more rely on others than I would have them rely upon me. If you felt what I wrote was slanted in some way (although you didn't specify how), why didn't you rewrite it? Surely you don't doubt the existence of anticommunism in Ireland? You seem to be going off-topic a little with your last sentence; please try to stay focused. Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 20:24, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: "Surely you don't doubt the existence of anticommunism in Ireland?" - Yes I do! So prove me wrong by getting a reliable reference. Snappy (talk) 20:30, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Extraordinary. I gave you more credit. Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 21:42, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll be waiting for that reference! Snappy (talk) 22:01, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent edits 

message: appears on point, and the later material on O'Duffy as well.  The source is, moreover, a tad POV, but RS.  See also some stuff by Ken Bradley. And  might also be usable.  Ditto    Collect (talk) 12:04, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Good stuff, thanks. Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 04:11, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  anti-communism sources 

message: http://www.rte.ie/archives/exhibitions/688-elections/691-general-election-1973/139425-election-1973/?page=1
86.41.81.235 (talk) 11:36, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Not Sure If This Link Helps But I'll Put It Here In Case It Is

message: Misclicked before I finished my edit summary again (just like at Communist Party of Britain). Regarding this edit, "socialism" is, in the context of the content in the article, a reference to the socialist stage of society as envisioned by Karl Marx. The CPI is not a "socialist party", it is a communist party advocating for a transition to socialism and eventually communism. CentreLeftRight ✉ 05:13, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Socialism"