Talk:Dublin and Monaghan bombings

message: Anyone know how this can be integrated into the article?  Superdude99 15:46, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: More info

message: Weggie,stop changing this.The British may have helped the UVF with this one. Dermo69 16:04, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Rumours of involvement should be kept in perspective. The Free state police may have blamed the 'British' to cover up their useless investigation - theories abound. Good day in school? Weggie 16:41, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We work from neutral sources not Tim Pat. Weggie 17:11, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: British involvement

message: I'm still reading Barron, (it's a long document) but I'm not happy with the way the article has developed so far. What we need for a wp article is clear concise facts, so that someone reading it can quickly understand the topic at hand. What we have here is reams of material cut and pasted from internet sources and transcribed here. This is not the way to write an article. To the average reader it is all but indecipherable and it also, at 40k, far too long. It should be cut to half that length at least. I'll be edting with these points in mind shortly.
Jdorney 13:09, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Article

message: Taking the following as my guide:
Drive-by tagging is not permitted. The editor who adds the tag must address the issues on the talk page, pointing to specific issues that are actionable within the content policies, namely Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Attribution, and Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Simply being of the opinion that a page is not neutral is not sufficient to justify the addition of the tag. Tags should be added as a last resort.
I propose to remove the neutrality dispute tag, as it has been up for well over a month, without any effort whatever to pinpoint the specific issues that are deemed problematic. If, on the basis of this removal, there is a flurry of counter activity, I will have difficulty in considering it in a positive light. The page has been successfully edited by new contributors, without any indication or suggestion that its neutrality is in question.
The McEntee report is scheduled to be published next week. Doubtless it will have further information relevant to the page. At that point, we can evaluate the relevance of McEntee's findings and how they might add to our understanding of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings of 1974.
Nomath 14:19, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Drive-by tagging 

message: I reverted vandalism by 172.188.248.164 and made note of it on the Irish Wikipedians board as there was more than one edit in this vandalism. Hopefully, this will be the end of the matter, but I suggest that contributors to the page keep an eye on it. Autarch 16:43, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism and reversion

message: Who actually died in all of this? Aatomic1 15:41, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Go to the external links section and have a look, the names of the dead are there in The Justice For The Forgotten link. BigDunc 15:51, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: I was just wondering

message: What always struck me about this bombing is that it was extremely successful (in its perpetrators' eyes), and very well organised - a true act of vicious, but not mindless, terrorism. This shows a sharp contrast to other loyalist attempts to bomb in the South which could safely be described as disorganised failures. Bombing outside their own territory seemed to be far outside the loyalist comfort zone. To me this was one of the two strongest arguments (along with the State's utter paralysis) for British government involvement at a senior, technical level. Has anyone done any work on this  that could be incorporated into the article?--Muinchille1 (talk) 12:54, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Talk to anyone in Dublin-even the cats in the alleyways believe that British Intelligence backed the operation. Had it been just the UVF job alone, why was were there not more attacks like it down south? After all, it would have been viewed as a success in their eyes and surely they would have continued with further attacks, especially after atrocities such as Kingsmill and Le Mon. Also, many people are convinced the Miami Showband Massacre was connected to the Dublin and Monaghan bombs. It appears the bombings were meant as a warning to Dublin to stay out of Northern affairs and to take a firmer stance against the IRA.--jeanne (talk) 13:29, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparision-likelihood British involvement 

message: Any photographic images of aftermath or memorials available? RashersTierney (talk) 13:11, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: The wikilink points to an article about a Liverpool footballer - surely this is a mistake?Autarch (talk) 12:25, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sammy Smyth 

message: The article describes Martha O'Neill (wife of Edward O'Neill, one of the dead) as having survived the bombing. In all the documents I've seen, I have found no evidence which places her in Parnell Street that day, where her husband and two sons were caught up in the first explosion as they left a barber's shop. The article, therefore is misleading in describing her as having survived, because it implies that she was present when the bomb went off. What do the other editors think? Should the article be changed?--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:41, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Martha O'Neill

message: The article needs some images of the bombings. Are any available for free-use? Many websites have photos of the bombings. Could I download these onto my computer, then upload them to article claiming fair-use?--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 08:46, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: There are objections (noted by reverts with cursory edit comments) to the addition of this article to a category regarding massacres. As no discussion has taken place, I would like to request comments on the issue. --86.12.24.209 (talk) 15:24, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Been discussed before (related discussion in this case), see Wikipedia:Irish wikipedians' notice board/Archive19. That you think the sky being blue is the same as an unsourced POV label being applied to an event is quite telling. I'm not seeing any argument in favour of inclusion, merely the false assumption that it is up to others to justify why the category shouldn't be added. 2 lines of K303 15:13, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Just as Hack has said, you have to indicate why the category is appropriate, not the other way 'round. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 15:32, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, 86.12.24.209, you need to start the ball rolling by putting forward your reasons behind the proposal for the new category.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:40, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Concurring with what is already being said immediately above, I requested more evidence in a related rfc here. Blue Rasberry 18:46, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category addition 

message: In the paragraph entitled "Dublin", the "15 minutes" seems to be wrong.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.182.5.195 (talk) 13:10, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, that was my error, as I had meant to say 17:45 not 15:45. It has since been corrected. Thank you for pointing that out.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 13:18, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  15 

message: Isn't it time, after 5 or so years, and considering the article even includes the car registration plates, that the Dáil (Irish parliament) comments by Ireland's political leaders should be added? Here goes...Red Hurley (talk) 10:32, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Dáil comments on 21 May 1974

message: Would we be able to upload an image of the bombing and use it as fair-use?--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 12:59, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair-use images

message: There needs to be a section on forensics. There is nothing in the article as to the size of the bombs, type of explosives used, etc.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 06:23, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Forensics]]

message: Murry, why remove WTA from the lede but not the categories? Gob Lofa (talk) 16:30, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  WTA 

message: The article said 'credible allegations'. Yet they were credible, but that term is a POV term that should not be used as it is editorialising. I have changed it to 'allegations taken seriously by inquiries'. 89.28.178.40 (talk) 10:04, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Technical issues with a word 

message: I believe this needs to be addressed.
I have been bold, but I believe I have taken the least controversial route. My other option would have been to change my selected comparative article Bloody Friday (1972) to read "terrorist attack", whoever I don't believe that would get as good a chance at fair discussion on Wikipedia.
There needs to be some consistency with regard to these articles. My personal opinion is that both this event and the event of Bloody Friday were terrorist attacks, as they were carried out by terrorists, and they terrorised the local populace.
However, other options for those I believe are apologists for terrorism (yup, that's also my opinion), for both articles would be "political attack" or simply "attack" as I have done here.
I would like to propose that all articles that are related to the Troubles in Northern Ireland are edited to follow suit, once a consensus is arrived at.
You simply cannot have articles so blatantly biased in favour of one organisation or political outlook over another, and call it an encyclopaedia.
Over to you, Wikipedians.
--98.122.20.56 (talk) 01:30, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terrorism, POV, even-handedness and systemic bias 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Dublin and Monaghan bombings. 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/20070526085606/http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm198990/cmhansrd/1990-01-30/Writtens-2.html to http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm198990/cmhansrd/1990-01-30/Writtens-2.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) 11:28, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Dublin and Monaghan bombings. 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/20110607081726/http://historical-debates.oireachtas.ie/D/0272/D.0272.197405210027.html to http://historical-debates.oireachtas.ie/D/0272/D.0272.197405210027.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050829062843/http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2005/01/02/story1281.asp to http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2005/01/02/story1281.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070503092220/http://www.rte.ie/news/2003/1209/primetime.html to http://www.rte.ie/news/2003/1209/primetime.html
*Added  tag to http://www.rte.ie/news/2003/1210/57live.html
*Added  tag to http://www.rte.ie/news/2003/1211/57live.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160303224859/http://www.tribune.ie/article.tvt?_scope=TribuneFTF&id=23418&SUBCAT=&SUBCATNAME=&DT=14%2F12%2F2003%2000%3A00%3A00&keywords=Susan%20McKay&FC= to http://www.tribune.ie/article.tvt?_scope=TribuneFTF&id=23418&SUBCAT=&SUBCATNAME=&DT=14%2F12%2F2003%2000%3A00%3A00&keywords=Susan%20McKay&FC=
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150402100804/http://dublincitypubliclibraries.com/image-galleries/digital-collections/1974-dublin-bombings to http://dublincitypubliclibraries.com/image-galleries/digital-collections/1974-dublin-bombings
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) 06:50, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: In this article it is noted that 34 people were killed in the bombings, including one unborn child. The boxout on the right states the number 34.
By contrast, the article on the Omagh bombing notes that 29 people were killed and also two unborn (twins) children. The number in the boxout is 29.
For consistency, the numbers in the boxouts for each article should either be 34 and 31, or 33 and 29. 
See also my post on the talk page for the Omagh bombing. 75.177.79.101 (talk) 03:39, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number of fatalities