Talk:Proclamation of the Irish Republic

message: The Easter Proclamation article and its associated talk page were moved to Proclamation of the Irish Republic on 2 June 2007. Scolaire 10:06, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Page move

message: The Tom Clarke on this page links to a very different Tom Clarke. Is there any way to fix that?
*It's fixed, now all we need is an article on Tom Clarke (Irish republican). Hint, hint.... - Nunh-huh 05:58, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Tom Clarke

message: This is on display in the Philatelic Office and is not well signposted.  It is, however, an original copy signed by the person who picked it up in 1916, and has a very good explanatory text beside it. Scolaire 14:09, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copy in the GPO 

message: If it's officially referred to as "Proclamation of the Republic", why is it here at "Easter Proclamation" (which is a very ambiguous title, even if the former doesn't say which Republic).
zoney  ♣ talk 12:22, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: The infobox is beautifully laid out, but unfortunately it is just too large for an article of this size, especially when there are other graphics close to the top.  I hope you don't mind that I have shortened it so that the items most relevant to this article are displayed.  Scolaire 08:09, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Infobox

message: I still feel strongly that these two words are POV.  My reasoning is as follows:
*Without the two words the section reads: "The document consisted of a number of assertions...that the Rising's leaders spoke for Ireland". This is NPOV and in fact stating the obvious, since the text is right there in the previous section.
*With the two words the section effectively reads: "The document consisted of a number of assertions...that the Rising's leaders spoke for Ireland, which was not in fact true". I'm not saying this is right or wrong, only that it is POV.
I hope that adequately explains my reasons for deleting these two words.
Scolaire 19:47, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 'Though unelected' revisited

message: The Exultet (a catholic hymn) is greatly referred to as the 'Easter Proclamation' - a cursory Google search will corroborate this. I was puzzled to find myself reading about an utterly dissimilar article when I searched for 'Easter Proclamation'. I have disambiguated the matter by adding a sentence at the beginning of the article. Chris Buttigieg 10:36, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Easter Proclamation vs Exultet

message: In the light of the above, and following on from an earlier discussion, I propose to move this article to Proclamation of the Irish Republic (which Mike Rosoft has very kindly created for us) and make this article a disambiguation page. Scolaire 07:47, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think its more commonly known as the "Easter Proclamation" - but possibly move it to "Proclamation of the Irish Republic" with the original page pointing towards both the hymn and the Proclamation.--Vintagekits 10:47, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm tempted to agree with the move. Seems to be a more proper title. -R. fiend 21:28, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Concur Brendandh 00:53, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Name revisited

message: In the "see also" section I have reverted to the names as they appear on the proclamation, elsewhere I have reverted to the names by which they were commonly known (see my comments on the Talk:Thomas Clarke (Irish republican) page).
Also, why are there so many entries in the "See also" section? Most of them have no direct relevance to the Proclamation, only a vague connection in that they deal with Irish history of the 1916-1922 period.
Scolaire 13:51, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Names of the signatories / See also

message: The image :Image:Irishrep.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --04:10, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:Irishrep.jpg

message: Who was the primary author of the proclamation? Pearse? The article mentions the signatories, but not who actually wrote it. Stu ’Bout ye! 15:22, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It was written by the seven signatories.  Pearse and Connolly are generally considered to have had the most input, but there is no evidence as to who wrote any specific bit.  Scolaire (talk) 07:35, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Author 

message: The "gallery" - photos of the seven signatories - does not IMO add anything to the article. As I said in my edit summary when I reverted it the first time, it is unnecessary and intrusive. The second attempt, a collapsible effort with a dark green bar, is truly hideous. There is no reason why there should not be photographs in the article, but the gallery should be abandoned.  Scolaire (talk) 23:17, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gallery 

message: Very poor article. I went to it looking for the text of the Proclamation! Where is it? Most people want to see the words in a clearly readable way.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Donn300 (talk • contribs) 21:45, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: , if you scroll down to See also, you will see an icon and a link that says, "Wikisource has original text related to this article: Proclamation of the Republic". Click it and you will get the text. This is an encyclopaedia article; Wikisource is for the source texts. You wouldn't go to the Bible article and expect to find the whole text there, would you? I agree with you that this article is not in great shape. Perhaps you could help towards improving it?  Scolaire (talk) 22:30, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Text

message: I previously reverted an edit blanking the section "The taking of the GPO", but this time I'm going to leave it. It was actually a totally unencyclopaedic section, talking about everything but the Proclamation.  Scolaire (talk) 18:55, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  The taking of the GPO 

message: It is normal Wikipedia style for the text of foundational documents to be part of their Wikipedia entry – this is done, for example, in the Wikipedia entries for the US Declaration of Independence, the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, etc. The text of the Proclamation should be part of this page. Pageturners (talk) 07:44, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The text was in the article until 28 October 2013, when it was removed because it was on Wikisource. It was not added again until a few days ago, when I reverted because I assumed there was a consensus not to have it. I have no strong feelings either way.  Scolaire (talk) 10:48, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Text of the Proclamation 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Proclamation of the Irish Republic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110726180848/http://www.nationalprintmuseum.ie/permanent.html to http://www.nationalprintmuseum.ie/permanent.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:04, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified