Talk:Éamon de Valera/Archive 2

message: Relative to the general standard of Wikipedia articles, this article seems weak. There is unsourced speculation and editorialising at several points. I made one attempt to change one particularly glaring example - "However, at the time and in the emotions of the moment, it lowered the respect for him held by people in combatant countries, who did not always fully appreciate the points and who were also influenced by indignation at his official and diplomatically proper condolences on the death of Hitler", but this was immediately reverted. I think there are more serious issues here than the spelling of the name. Buyo
 
:Actually it took nearly a day before someone reverted. Djegan 13:08, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Vague and opinionated

message: Re the most recent changes reverted back:
# de Valera and others chose to put a fada on the e in his first name. The article simply reflected that widespread usage when referring to him.
# Dev is 100% wrong. His nickname was always deV, reflecting his name, which was spelt with a small d and a capital v. FearÉIREANN 20:11, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm. I don't know an awful lot about this matter, but a couple of years ago I was given a copy of a book called "Dev and his Alma Mater" ([sic], about his times at Blackrock College), by the author, a priest who was a contemporary of de Valera. In the book he uses the version "Dev" throughout, and querying him about the fada on the E he assured me that de Valera himself spelt the name without one! I have seen examples with fadas, but only when the writing was in Irish itself. What do you think? --Kwekubo 20:17, 8 Jan 2004 (UTC)

text: If you say so, jtd. So shall we move the article to Éamon de Valera, then? -- Kwekubo 19:45, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)

text: Even if Eamon de Valera did put an accent on the E, it is pretty much always anglicised by removing the accent. I think it should be at Eamon de Valera. Talrias (t | e | c) 15:11, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Éamon de Valera vs. Eamon de Valera

message: The General Registry Office of Ireland have provided what appears to be a certified death certificate on the internet as a sample of their modernisation plan. Djegan 16:43, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Death Certificate

message: Please change the name of the page to Éamon de Valera, as that is the proper spelling of the first name, not Eamon.
63.164.145.33 11:06, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Birth Name

message: The opinions repeatedly expressed by Demiurge re his analysis of WWII era geopolitics are just that--opinions. There are no citations or sources.
He continually skews everything to favour the Irish government whose refugee policy was genocidal in nature.
As far as whether or not the US entering the war earlier would have been a good thing is self-evident to any sensient human being on the face of the earth, and if Demiurge chooses to disagree, he will have to provide SOURCES and CITATIONS as he routinely demands of others. 
He is clearly behaving as a censor in this matter, and I have no intention of backing down. The war dead, who might have survived, had it not been for Irish and Irish-American selfishness and hatred during that period of time demand no less from posterity, and as an Irishman I can do no less than oblige.
Brandubh Blathmac 23:40, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Analysis & Neutrality characteristics

message: Demiurge, Jtdirl, et al: I am not going to engage in a revert war at this time. I have contacted the necessary outside individuals to review this matter, and have advised them as to what they can expect to hear from you (boilerplate nonsense) regarding this matter.
As the Irish say, when the Good Lord created time, he made a lot of it, so I am willing and am going to wait for these individuals to review this matter.
Brandubh Blathmac 00:54, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: * I like what you just added - I think the point needs to be made (RMS aside!). BTW, the "body politic" comment also appears in the footnotes of the Douglas Hyde article - Ali-oops? 15:33, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Effective April 6, 2006 (European time)

message: At the bottom of the article, it states:
"See also
* List of illegitimates"
There isn't even a webpage for "List of illegitimates" and even if there was a wikipedia webpage, de Valera should not be on it because there is no PROOF that he was illegitimate.  
I think that this should be removed from de Valera's webpage.  It is not a NPOV. I would remove it myself if the page weren't protected. Bcsurvivor 17:32, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: List of illegitimates

message: * For the record the Nazis included all of the Jews of Ireland to be killed in the Wannsee Conference. This could only happen if the Nazis invaded "neutral" Eire.
:As usual (see also Norway), both sides had actually well-developed plans to invade the neutral Eire. One of the German plans for invading Great Britain involved coming through lightly defended Eire into Northern Ireland, then crossing the Irish Sea to come down through Lancashire. David | Talk 13:14, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Wannsee Conference was, probably, the reason why the the Jews in Vittel, who were inssued with Irish visas, on deV's instructions, at Rabbi Herzog's request, were exterminated.  There was the, mistaken, expectation that Irish visas would preserve them.  ClemMcGann 17:03, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality of Eire in World War II

message: There is nothing , really, about the Press here.  I don't know where it would slot in though. help? --Irishpunktom\talk 14:45, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In the Overview section is mention of his newspaper involvement. Perhaps that needs some expansion though I do not know any more details than what is already in the individual articles: The Irish Press, The Sunday Press & the Evening Press. ww2censor 15:20, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The press

message: It might be an interesting fact to add to the article, that of all the prime ministers of the comonwealth ÉdV was the only one to vote for Miss Simpson becoming the legitimate wife and queen of Edward VIII. The article on the Abdication_Crisis_of_Edward_VIII has more info, but at present I can't get around to write something nice myself...Zemlod 17:11, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Edward VIII abdication crisis

message: A section on the page reads...
:"He was considered erratic, idealistic, tactful, sometimes tactless, conservative and rarely pragmatic. His tenure in office as Taoiseach until aged 77 was too long
This opinion is referenced not to a reliable source but to additional opinion apparently unsourced itself which reads...
:Revolutionary and idealistic leaders make poor politicians in peace-time, Fidel Castro being an example of this. Churchill was rejected by the electorate in post war Britain 
Er... What? Any complaints if I remove this so we adhere to policy?--Zleitzen 14:14, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  If you look at the references cited in this section you will see that Garret Fitzgerald stated that deValera's last term was as Taoiseach a disaster. Discussion of his dominance and the corresponding lack of growth in the Irish economy is referred to by his biographers. The statement about revolutionary leaders is widespread in analyses of their tenure.Tayana 16:41, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The referencing is all wrong. In addition to an opinion sentence referenced to... an Original research opinion about Fidel Castro and Churchill, there is the quote from Fitzgerald that is unverifiable and not correctly referenced. Whatsmore, the sentences are not attributed to Fitzgerald - they are attributed apparently to no one - Fitzgerald's statement comes after.--Zleitzen 16:50, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The reference to his last term as Taoiseach as described by Garret Fitzgerald has been fixed by a minor edit by moving the reference to a different portion of the sentence.Please click on the superscript reference. No change to the substantive arguement. Tayana 17:13, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see any improvement so I've just cut out the unsourced original research about Fidel Castro and Winston Churchill which has no place here. --Zleitzen 18:30, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tenure too long?

message: Something wrong here:
.. he won further scholarships and exhibitions and in 1903  was appointed professor of mathematics at Rockwell College, County Tipperary. He graduated in mathematics in 1904 
Anybody correct the discrepancy?
* Tayana 17:29, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks but I don't think you are the one to make this decision. That should be up to the WikiProject Biography not a new user like yourself. ww2censor 20:47, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am reverting the biography class rating back to A because I don't think  has the Wikipedia experience to make the decision to demote it to B. The logic is flawed as one small discrepancy does not mean the whole article is suspect because of that and Tayana has not provided any alternate information to show there are any other problems, she just assumes there are accuracy issues. I was unable to confirm or refute the 1903/1904 professorship. Having been to Rockwell, though many years after de Valera's time, I suspect that the teaching position he had there had the title of professor rather then actually being a professor which he attained the following year. Remember that teachers were treated with greater respect than they are today. Perhaps the title of professor should be changed to teacher and this will satisfy any nay-sayers. Cheers ww2censor 16:04, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Agreed - needs some work but definitely the standard that articles should be aiming for. Djegan 16:17, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Sorry, but as an unregistered editor, who hides behind anonymity AND who fails to show any experience on Wikipedia, this comment is not warranted. What knowledge do you have and what have YOU done to show any bona fide knowledge of this subject? Besides which you are not a member of the Biography Wikiproject that decided on the classification in the first place. When you are a member of that group, and show experience at Wikipedia editing, you can criticise the classification with credibility. ww2censor 00:15, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Indeed, can you show that you have any of these attributes, viz experience or objectivity, that entitle you to declare the rating before others - and that the rating by the anonymous was in good faith and also that that person has the required attributes. You are very opinionated and confident for a relative newcomer. But one person cannot decide the rating. Djegan 22:14, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well actually my statement is very credible. The anon uses made one edit on this talk page, that was the only one edit made here by that user around that time from an IP address. Unfortunately, being an anon IP address means we cannot say with certainly the person did, or did not, make any more edits on Wikipedia. We do see clearly that Tayana is a relatively new user (nothing wrong with that at all) and maybe does not realise the article class rating is not just decided by any single editor who chooses a classification they think an article deserves, but there is a procedure whereby the Biography WikiProject members, who number more that 150 regular editors and 10 admin editors, come to a consensus on the classification to be awarded. I too implicitly assume that you Tayana, in your own words, contribute positively but this reclassification is not up to you alone. If you are so annoyed by the article classification, then go to the Biography WikiProject and ask for another assessment, but please don't give credence to one editor with one edit on this talk page as real support for your desire to reclassify this article. On the other hand perhaps you would give some credence to my suggestions re Rockwell above and check with them if they would have called him a professor, even though he had not yet received his degree. If this one thing is so critical to you, as it seems to be, then why don't you try to resolve it with some verifiable facts and not just try to change a classification decided by a group of, we presume, intelligent and experienced editors. BTW, demoting an article class from A to B is a drop of 2 classes not one class which would make it a GA. ww2censor 05:15, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I have to say that, although ww2censor is undoubtedly correct about the way in which the rating is arrived at, the responses give the impression of a degree of elitism.  I think that the issue about not editing the classification could have been made in a far less antagonistic way.  It is certainly not the way to encourage people to participate in Wikipedia, and without the constant addition of new voices, Wikipedia will become a partial POV operation.  The last post was less hostile, but an apology to Tayana for the rather aggressive postings might be nice.  Then again, as I am a new participant, maybe I don't have the knowledge or credibility to make any such comment ;-) Iain1917 08:38, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: B-class is the best it can get for now, sorry. And before you all start complaining again, I am a member of the Biography project, and I'm appalled at the ease at which certain editors hand out A-class ratings. A-class ratings should be reserved for those  articles that are clearly better than the average GA and have no policy problems at all (unlike this article). Errabee 16:20, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Childhood

message: I deleted the Overview section, which included a great deal of Point of View and Original Research. There was some good stuff in it, though, so I took the facts I found and inserted them elsewhere within the article. This is part of a sincere attempt we should all make to reduce the length of this article and to remove unsourced facts and opinion. (Also: My suggestion would be to take the Churchill-DeValera controversy and make a new article of it.} In the meantime, we should all work to rid WikiP of as many Citation Needed tags as possible. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis 20:09, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overview section. 

message: I am on a campaign to get rid of Citation Neededs as listed at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Articles_with_unsourced_statements&from=Z, but I find that this page is almost impossible to work with. It seems there is too much reversion and Bad Faith going on. Nevertheless, I will soldier on and attempt to fix one Citation Needed at a time, but not being an expert on Irish history, I am sure I am not going to find the Sources on my own and must rely on others to insert them. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis 15:19, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Impossible page to work with?