Talk:Shankill Road

message: I'm unsure that '…found themselves as, generally unwilling, targets for crossfire…' makes a great deal of sense. I believe that very few people indeed are willing targets for crossfire, and that the sentence is actually trying to get at the point that crossfire between the paramilitaries often failed to find its targets and instead hit bystanders. But I might be wrong. Any light to shed? Zetetic Apparatchik (talk) 12:56, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unwilling 

message: "St. Matthew's graveyard has a tombstone in memory of a 14 year-old Royal Air Force member who was killed in the First World War. The youngest serving soldier ever to die in the British armed forces"
I'm sorry but you really need evidence to back this up as its very dubious. Why is it dubious? Because a 14 year old boy from my home village of Tobermore died in WWI serving with the Ulster Regiment. We even have a burial for an 8 year old boy, Bobby Wisner, who died in WWI serving as a British army messenger boy. Though not a soldier he could be the youngest person to die serving the British armed forces and was buried with full military honours. Mabuska (talk) 21:43, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As a source hasn't been added in over 9 months i'm removing the statement. Mabuska (talk) 12:53, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The grave exists and a picture has now been added. As to the other issue it would be too hard to prove so I have rewritten it as being "amongst the youngest" rather than the youngest. Keresaspa (talk) 00:30, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Youngest serving soldier to die in the British armed forces??? 

message: There seems to be a big gap between the very early years of the Shankill road, and the jump to the troubles. Historically however the area has been in a state of unrest since the late 1800's, with frequent riots between Shankill protestants and catholics of the Pound. Ref: Holy War in Belfast, by Andrew Boyd  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.143.134.167 (talk) 16:25, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical information 

message: The article should have an image in the lead, preferably a panoramic view of the street itself rather than murals or specific buildings. That way a reader can get the "feel of the place".--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 08:51, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Image is needed for the lead

message: There should be a section on popular Shankill "watering holes" such as the Rex, Brown Bear, Royal Bar, Windsor Bar, Long Bar, Imperial, etc.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:31, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Popular pubs

message: That language section needs to go or to be completely rewritten. The main problems I can see are as in order of occurrence: 
#It gives no source for Ulster Scots being used and almost seems to be working on the basis that it's a loyalist area so there must be a bit of Ulster Scots floating about. 
#The figures for Irish speaking appear to be original research as the reference is just to the general census website rather than a page showing a breakdown of languages on the Shankill itself. It can only be inferred from this that the author drew out the percentage figures his or her self by going through the raw data in the census records, something that would obviously count as WP:OR.
#It doesn't define what it means by the Shankill where one in thirty Protestants spoke Irish; is it people whose address was the Shankill Road itself or does it include all the streets that lead off where most inhabitants live? If so were all streets included or just a sample? Also, if so where did the author decide to draw the boundaries of the Shankill as some streets could conceivably have been considered Shankill and Falls Road (e.g Conway Street)? Does it include Woodvale, Glencairn and Highfield (assuming they existed)? 
#The whole thing about the rural nature of Protestant Irish speakers in a specific district is just an assumption. It may have been the case but raw statistical data compared across two censuses in no way proves this. I suppose the author of the section could have collated the listed place of birth for each Shankill-dwelling Irish speaker but again that would be WP:OR. 
#It seems to exist only to prove some tired old point about Irish having been a "Protestant" language in the past. With proper sourcing such a point could and possibly should be covered in the Irish language article itself but it doesn't serve any purpose here to my mind.
#Why limit it just to the Protestant Irish speakers? I'm sure there were a few Shankill Catholics on both censuses, so why exclude their readings? Presumably this links back to point five. 
I should declare that I have little or no expertise in this area and so I can't make any useful edits to that section. I'll leave it for a while but unless it improves or there are major objections (and even then improvements would be necessary for the reasons outlined) I would favour removing it. Keresaspa (talk) 01:38, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Unless it's sourced it is viable for removal. There are a few Catholics in the Shankill area, last census report i seen placed them to about 0.3% or something of the areas population (if i remember that figure correctly). Mabuska (talk) 10:58, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The only cited thing in the now removed section was an instance of original research at its strongest. Selective picking of census records to create numbers and percentages for addition to this article. Just to add Keresaspa, your point 5 i think misses the mark - i would say its more of an attempt to rub it in the faces of the largely anti-Irish language inhabitants of the Shankill today that their ancestors spoke it. Mabuska (talk) 18:18, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Not heard the annual Ballynafeigh Community Development Association talk on the Protestant origins of the Irish language then? Or the stuff in the News Letter a lot of years ago about the same thing? Still, that's little odds we are agreed on the section not being viable. Keresaspa (talk) 16:32, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: "Protestant origins of the Irish language" - The first is around 500 years old the other possibly 2,000. SOmething's not right with that statement. Mabuska (talk) 11:03, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The talks are invariably about how until the nineteenth century Irish speaking in Northern Ireland/the north/Ulster was supposedly confined mainly to the Protestant population with the Catholics favouring English until the Gaelic revival. I was clearly being brief. Keresaspa (talk) 20:35, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hello, I was the person that initially added the language section. Keresaspa, in response to your intitial points, thank you for taking the time to make your comments, and I've taken on board what you have said - and I must say you were quite right to take the piece down. I'm afraid I didn't realise about the original research rule being new, so apologies on that. As an aside, I am a researcher in Irish language demographics, and while I would stand over the results, as you say it has no place (unless I can take it out of published matter). If it is any interest, the census details for the Shankill Road refer specifically to those houses on the Shankill itself. I think there were 6 Catholic individuals in 1901 and none in 1911 speaking Irish on the road. I take on board your points also regarding singling Protestant Gaelic speakers out, perhaps it would have been better to make mention of Catholics too - what I naively meant as a statement to show that being an Irish speaker shouldn't in the specific case be seen as an indicator of religion could have been stated more roundly. Re: Ulster Scots, my source for the language on the Shankill comes from the Ulster Scots magazine "Oot an aboot": but as you say, I should have specific references to back this up. Again thank you for your points, and you are quite right to take it down under the cicumstances. Just to note, I wasn't trying to make statements about the "Protestant origins of the Irish language", I'm not actually familiar with that argument, but would be interested in hearing about it - I know there was a Church of Ireland group formed in 1914 popular in Belfast and Dublin which pushed use of the Irish language in Anglican Church services in Ireland - its still around and is called the Cumann Gaelach na hEaglaise. There was an interview I came across with Linda Ervine (of the PUP and sister-in-law of the late David) that made the points about the census returns, which led me to work the figures to check it out ( http://nuachtlitreacha.ranganna.com/NewsletterArticle.aspx?id=171&lang=en ): I just thought it was an interesting set of statistics given peoples preconceptions. To Mabuska: grow up and crawl out from whatever rock you live under. Just because you're narrow minded doesn't mean we all are. 109.77.79.203 (talk) 16:16, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough - I didn't mean to bite the new guy. WP:OR will tell you everything you need to know. If you have the exact reference for the Ulster Scots bit (issue number and page number if possible) then it can be added somewhere in the article that there is Ulster Scots on the road. Similarly the Linda Ervine article you link to above can be used to reference a sentence or two mentioning that the Irish language used to be more widely spoken in the area than it is now. Unfortunately the actual statistics would be original research which is a shame given the work you have done to develop them from the raw census data but unfortunately those are the rules. I'm afraid despite everything I've said I can't add anything about the Irish language and Protestantism as, whilst I have encountered information about it in the past, I can't recall the specifics and it is quite a bit outside my own areas of expertise. Keresaspa (talk) 18:52, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Just in case anybody still cares about this there is now a book available entitled "Presbyterians and the Irish Language" that deals with this issue. I haven't read so I can't vouch for its accuracy or readability, and who the publisher is does rather suggest it will be written from a strongly unionist perspective, but it's out there for anybody interested. Keresaspa (talk) 16:51, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Language section 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Shankill Road. 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/20120130065828/http://www.belfastinterfaceproject.org/interfacemap6.html to http://www.belfastinterfaceproject.org/interfacemap6.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111007035119/http://www.woodvalefc.com/nwsf.htm to http://www.woodvalefc.com/nwsf.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111108215050/http://translink.co.uk/Documents/Metro%20Maps%201%20Sept%202011/metro%2011.pdf to http://www.translink.co.uk/Documents/Metro%20Maps%201%20Sept%202011/metro%2011.pdf
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) 01:31, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:53, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion