Talk:Northern Ireland/Archive 4

message: "Generally speaking, do you think of yourself as a unionist, a nationalist or neither?"
*Unionist	38%
*Nationalist     24%
*Neither         35%
First, please cite your sources, and don't just delete them. Second, I interpret this as 38% in favour of unionism, 24% in favour of nationalism, and 35% not expressing a preference. This is not the same as wishing to remain part of the UK. -- zzuuzz (talk) 17:57, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, so it is certainly wrong to suggest that 66% are in favour of the unionist position, which is why I added the correct figure and source for your edit which said that. I suggest this section says exactly what is referenced - that 38% describe themselves as unionist, 24% describe themselves as nationalist, and 35% describe themselves as neither. -- zzuuzz (talk) 18:26, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Do you have any sources to say 66% wish to remain part of the UK?. Do you have any sources which say that 45.5% of the population are Protestants? -- zzuuzz (talk) 18:47, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Incidentally, I noticed you changing the number first, marking the edit as minor (which it certainly is not), and not using an edit summary. Looking through the page history the source used until fairly recently was this survey - which says 59% think the long term policy for Northern Ireland should be... - however again this relates to the government's policy, and not their personal preference (in favour of...). I have no idea why you removed a valid source, or why you later removed the template saying that the statements are unsourced. The Protestant figure is still wrong, and I encourage you to acknowledge both statements are still unsourced. -- zzuuzz (talk) 19:09, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

text: So, no sources then? -- zzuuzz (talk) 08:28, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Unionist or Nationalist?

message: On the third paragraph, it read:
Northern Ireland was for many years the site of a bitter ethnic/religious campaign of violence between a minority of Nationalists (who wanted it to be reunified with the Republic of Ireland) and a majority of Unionists (who wanted it to remain part of the United Kingdom). The campaign was known popularly as The Troubles.
I think that's worded badly, as there has been fighting in that way for hundreds of years in Northern Ireland. Thoughts? (Also, first talk page comment. :) ) --Pauric 03:05, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There can't have been "fighting in that way" for "hundreds of years in Northern Ireland" as Northern Ireland has only existed for 85 years. --Mal 13:43, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Has there not been sectarian strife of one form or another in Ulster long before the advent of Northern Ireland? Also, the passage makes it sound as though only a minority of Nationalists want a United Ireland, and a minority of Unionists want to remain part of the UK! Martin 21:24, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bad wording on third paragraph? 

message: The article is getting a bit messy.  Again.  I would suggest moving the lists of towns and places of interest to the bottom of the article (it looks very broken up and bitty atm), and also paring the politics/demographics section back to what it was a year or so ago - there is an extensive specific artile on the subject.  Also, the flags controversy is waaaay to prominent.  Most people in NI/Ulster/the Six County pseudo-statelet never fly a flag in their puff.  If it needs to be in the article it can go down a bit.  Gerry Lynch 12:34, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Article getting messy again

message: Added a cite on "Some Unionists argue that any discrimination was not just because of religious or political bigotry, but also the result of more complex socio-economic, socio-political and geographical factors" Dont know what it means or who it refers to. Added detail on the arsenal of loyalist paramilitaries and link to IICD. Cleared up some grammar.  Shame there is no economy section yet, or immigration section. Good work otherwise, tricky subject. Fluffy999 20:37, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Added

message: I thought that the Assembly has been un-suspended... Am I wrong? -   calum 10:57, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It has only been semi-un-suspended, it still can't do anything theoretically. It has still no powers, they are still with the Secretary of  State. But in Northern Ireland getting a group politicians to sit in the same room is seen as a huge achievement. theKeith  11:01, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a very long and uninteresting piece on [] explaining the difference between the 'assembly' and the current assembly of memebers. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.12.249.63 (talk • contribs) 20:54, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I presume you're referring to the debate on the 16th of May. What we have now is "the Assembly", not the "Northern Ireland Assembly". --Kwekubo 17:18, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stormont 

message: I've added the two new names to the names section.Ive included that they are not serious but they are used so please dont delete them.Dermo69
: Well Norn Iron is very common usage but I've never heard it used specifically only related to the football team. It's an exceeding common phrase for the country that plays on the Northern Irish tendancy to drop parts of words when increasing the spoken speech. As for the Not Brazil, I think that should go as it's very specialised and I've never actually heard it used. Ben W Bell talk 13:44, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you entirely. The "We're not Brazil" chant is already explained at Northern Ireland national football team. --Kwekubo 17:18, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Names

message: The section titled Lives lost in the “Troubles” lists some percentages but needs actual numbers of deaths.  Someone unfamiliar with the situation might think it's 1 million people, or 100.  Tempshill 15:55, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Lives lost in the "Troubles"'' section needs numbers 

message: From the article: The province of Ulster covers a greater landmass than Northern Ireland (though it didn't always) - what is the source for this last bit?  I imagine it's safe to assume that the Kingdom of Ulster was once a lot smaller than 1/4 of the island, but the above seems to imply that it was once co-terminous with present-day Northern Ireland, which seems pretty unlikely. --Ryano 09:04, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this sentence needs re-worded or simply ignored for the reasons cited above. Perhaps the insertion of the word 'modern', as in "The modern province of Ulster..." would suffice. The borders of all the provinces have changed over the centuries, and were finally established in their current forms officially by a British monarch. --Mal 09:18, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree, although "modern" might give the wrong idea also, as the boundaries were set in Elizabethan times. --Ryano 09:21, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is really dredging the depths of my memory from primary school, but didn't there used to be five provinces/kingdoms? (Hence the Irish for province, Cúaige, meaning a fifth)  and may seven before that?  But this would be pre-Norman invasion.  --Red King 19:51, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Yup - the midland Gaelic colony, Meath, used to be a province. --Mal 17:22, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extent of Ulster 

message: I think it's fair to add Polish into the languages section at the top, although I was unable to find a source with a bit of quick googling to back up my addition, (and I know people can be somewhat protective of changes on the Northern Ireland article ;) ) I was hoping either someone could help find a source, or just agree, because it's obvious, there is signifigantly more Polish spoken here than there is Irish or Ulster Scots. Pauric 23:44, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Languages 

message: If its any help, we here in the south usually refer to all the inhabitants of Northern Ireland simply as "Northerners", whatever community you claim to come from. Not sure what they call us, other than "Free Staters" (sic) or "Fenian bastards" (sic). Fergananim 13:01, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Em. You are a bit behind with your names, Gringo. Ceanannas Mór was axed as a name in the late 1980s and replaced by simply by Kells with Ceanannas as its Irish translation. I lived there at the time and there was a lot of happy people when Ceanannas Mór was dumped. It was a pain in the proverbial arse. You had all these tourists looking to find the town made famous by the Book of Kells but who couldn't find it because all the signs said Ceanannas Mór. That name is no more. The council and the minister binned it. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 01:38, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  JD. Maybe I just know the people of those particular times a bit better? I've had this conversation before with residents of Kenlis and I must say that the people in question were among the most unenlightened members of Irish society. That's usually the guideline for me. Being around 12 at the time, I had the good sense to tell them precisely this to huge laughter in the hollow halls of the big house surrounded by trees. They were so chuffed to be on that side of the walls of Kenlis they drew my wrath down on them. Sophistication, for them, was a trip to Balladuff (for the mart, of course, oh cultureless ones!) on a Thursday and a trip over to Mullagh on a Sunday morning for a cockfight down beside "the cross". A productive conversation was one along the lines of 'Bejaysas, didn't that bullock have a fine arse on it, Shayme?' And that, make no mistake about it, was serious business in Ceanannas Mór. And you daren't say anything bad about one 'John V', the finest defender of their interests in the Dáil. Oh, and no apologies about that little incident in Spain in the 1930s, either. It was the whole package I was dealing with. I'd sit for hours talking with them and usually the only vocabulary I had left for them was 'Oh Jaysas', followed by the nod of my head. We built up a great friendship and lifelong respect based on such honest exchanges. How do you change the redirect on the Kells page? Ceanannas Mór should only go to the Meath Kells. El Gringo 13:32, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Done. I've also updated the page on Kells Co Meath to refer to the change in name. I remember all the fanfare there was when the old Ceanannas Mór signs were taken down and replaced by Ceanannas. I'm afraid Mór is no more (or no mór if you prefer!). As to John V. how is he these days? I haven't seen him in years. I missed the Virginia Horse Show this year unfortunately. I haven't been Mullagh in ages either. Nor Moyalty (of "All to one side like the town of . . . " fame). Damn it. I must start visiting there again. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 00:51, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: British/Northern Irish/Irish

message: I live in Belfast and I am an Irish speaker. I have changed the Irish name of Northern Ireland to "Na Sé Chontae" to reflect the fact that this is the Irish name given to Northern Ireland. Tuaisceart Éireann is just the direct translation from English into Irish. Irish speakers refer to Northern Ireland as "Na Sé Chontae". Irish doesn't always directly translate into English and vice versa. Seamus2602 21:42, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good for you, the Irish wiki is at http://ga.wikipedia.org. As for the name, whatever next? Djegan 21:46, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Na Sé Chontae means "Six Counties" in Irish, and while I've no problems labelling it as so, it does not literally mean "Northern Ireland".  I agree that the area is often called the six counties, however, and think that the term should be inserted in the article somewhere. hoopydinkConas tá tú? 21:50, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

text: This is the English wikipedia first most. Djegan 22:02, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: When we're dealing with the Irish name for a place, then the Irish language should be correct.  Most Irish speakers use the Six Counties name. hoopydinkConas tá tú? 22:04, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Many people say "American" when they mean United States. Djegan 22:06, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You are missing the point mate. I live in Belfast. I live in an area where Irish is spoken every day. I have never heard the name Tuaisceart Éireann being used for Northern Ireland. If you don't like that fact remove the Irish name all together. I would prefer the Irish name to not be there than a wrong Irish name to be there. User:Seamus2602 22:08, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Even if you are correct, just because Na Sé Chontae may be the common term as Gaeilge does not mean it is the most appropriate term to use in this article. Tuaisceart Éireann is the official term as Gaeilge. I believe the article mentions alternative names for the North already. I find it hard to beleive you are not just pushing a viewpoint. zoney  ♣ talk 23:30, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not that I speak Irish, but the six counties name seems more plausible to me. Who'se going to name another region of their country "Northern Ireland". Northern ireland is hardly even the north of ireland, as it only takes up six of the 32 counties of Ireland. Wikisquared 14:17, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The only problem with that logic is that Northern Ireland is not just a region.  It is currently separate from the other 26 counties and under UK rule (i.e. a separate country from the Republic of Ireland). hoopydinkConas tá tú? 14:53, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A separate state, not country. Just because most of Ireland got home rule while the rest remained in the United Kingdom doesn't mean the northeast suddenly became a country in its own right. Nor does the use of the term "Ireland" by the Republic mean that the island as a whole is no longer Ireland, nor does it change what the Irish nation is. zoney  ♣ talk 11:41, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Northern Ireland is not a state either. Djegan 18:54, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree Na Sé Chontae should be used.  Just because its isn't the literal translation, doesn't mean it shouldn't be the version used.  A lot of towns (eg Cookstown, Coalisland, etc) do not use literal translations for their Irish versions.  This does not make the version wrong, it just reflects better what Irish speakers refer to the place as. (Derry Boi 10:22, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Irish Name 

message: Since the infobox was changed the top three lines of text (Northern Ireland (English), Tuaisceart Éireann, (Irish) and Norlin Airlann (Ulster Scots)) haven't been looking right. The spacing doesn't look right. Anyone else noticed this or is it just me? I can't seem to fix it. Stu ’Bout ye! 08:00, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I added   after Tuaisceart Éireann which acts like the subset 1 after Norlin Airlann. Maybe someone could take a look at the template for a better solution.   Keithology  Talk!  08:41, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just noticed the same problem and was about to start a new topic until I saw this one.  I noticed the scale of the problem depends on the text size you set your browser to. With IE6, the words 'Norlin Airlinn'have their bottom halves lopped off when the text size is set to 'smaller' or 'largest' although frankly the words sit together pretty uncomfortably whichever text size is used. Kaid100 18:57, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

text: You can refer to the Norlin Airlin section below on this, but I say remove the superscript/subnote on Norlin Airlin altogether. Of course it's a neologism or new word, the state's not even 100 years old!! The Norn Iron bit is irrelevant. It's not part of any language any more than "innit" is. beano 19:01, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Infobox

message: Please see this discussion. Any input would be appreciated. Stu ’Bout ye! 21:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Deaths statistics

message: What's the general term for people from down south? Just curious Fergananim 19:24, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: From who's perspective?
I wasn't sure this question deserved an answer at first. But I'll assume Good Faith and inform you that the term "Fenian bastards" is an insult used by a small minority (people who would generally be called loyalists and bigots). Nor does the phrase, when used, apply solely to people from the Republic of Ireland. The phrase is used variously to describe Irish Roman Catholics, Nationalists, or specifically republicans (with emphasis on specifically millitant republicans). Sometimes it is used in Northern Ireland jokingly, in mixed company - usually only when the atmosphere is friendly.
The term "Free Staters" is, I think, becoming antiquated and obviously referes to one of the names the Republic of Ireland had previously been known as. --Mal 20:30, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I still hear "Free Staters" quite a bit. The most common is probably "Southerners". "Dirty Mexicans" is certainly the best term though :P ;) Jonto 14:49, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Certainly down here, "northerner" is the most common term for someone from, well, the North. I guess this is applied to Donegal or even Cavan/Monaghan folk too though. zoney  ♣ talk 23:36, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Besides ''"Free Staters" (sic) or "Fenian bastards" (sic)''

message: :(duplicate post by josh removed --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 09:00, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: On the Northern Ireland page of Wikipedia the four Home Nations and four constituent countries of the United Kingdom are in fact England, Scotland, Wales, and er.. umm... England. Northern Ireland is officially an Entity of the United Kingdom. Anything on .gov.uk is not an valid source for this page. The discussion is here.   theKeith  Talk!  12:48, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Northern Ireland is a country 

message: It seams their is no end to this fiasco and farce, see Talk:Constituent_country#Requested_move_2. Djegan 22:15, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Move request at constituent country

message: I have added a dubious tag to the introductory sentence. The sentence used to state that Northern Ireland is one of the four constituent countries of the United Kingdom. This was changed to the WP:NOR phrase "constituent entities", then to "constituent elements", and now to "constituent parts".
The phrase has again been changed recently to remove the part "one of the four".
Northern Ireland is, however, one of the four constituent countries of the United Kingdom. I believe we should re-add the phrase, as it has been verified and sources have been cited in this and in other relevent articles (England, Scotland, Wales, United Kingdom and Home Nations).
I had added a reference note, suggesting that some people mightn't particularly like the phrase "constituent country" when applied to Northern Ireland.. as a compromise. That too was removed. --Mal 15:23, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Dubious

message: Considering recent confusion and dispute regarding constituent country/element/part status of Northern Ireland I propose that we dump the premise of such status (in the main body at least) as they are high dubious as shown. Instead, in the main body, we should use the terminology of the Northern Ireland Act viz "part of the United Kingdom" and nothing more. A constituent status footnote, appropriately cited, could be retained. Djegan 18:24, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why is it dubious that UK government and the (RoI) Irish government websites show use of the term "constituent country"? The weasel wording of constituent part as a piped link to Home Nations is clearly a violation of WP:NPOV which requires at the outset that "all articles must be written from a neutral point of view, that is, they must represent all significant views fairly and without bias". This seems to be an attempt to censor an official government view to present only the presumed viewpoint of those with allegiance to an adjacent country. If the term is controversial, the controversy should be made clear in the opening paragraph of the lede, and the article should include proper representation of both viewpoints as expressed in reliable sources which should be properly cited. .. dave souza, talk 20:53, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As you can see from WP:VERIFY the fact that something is used on an external sources does not mean that it should and must be used on wikipedia. The question here has been that has the term sufficent usage that qualifies it as an authoritive and definitive discription of the Northern Ireland and United Kingdom relationship, viz WP:NOR. It appears on a few faqs and the like - so what? (if their was authoritive and definitive sources they would be forthcoming, long ago) Incidentially that claim of usage on a Irish government website is one usage in the Houses of the Oireachtas in all the parliamentary debates since 1919 until recently (with regard to results relevent to Northern Ireland/United Kingdom). Djegan 21:05, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I support your removal of the "piped link" - I agree its dubious and misleading at best. A paragraph that weighs up the viewpoints of "constituent country" would not be unacceptable. As long as the outlandish claim that faqs and the like are somehow the final and definitive word on status. Djegan 21:29, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

text: WP:V says nothing about there being a requirement for "sufficient usage" - where did you get that from? From a quick google, looking at the first 20 of about 25,300 for "northern ireland" "constituent country" .gov,  I find that the Department for Constitutional Affairs is happy to use it, as is Defra, and Hansard provides a table which clearly demonstrates its usage. There are also a lot of government pdfs using the term to describe NI. The extent and context of the usage should be stated, as should the usage that NI is a country. And what you claim was the "one usage" is from Dáil Éireann - Volume 541 - 03 October, 2001, the Minister for Health and Children (Mr. Martin): not as ancient as you suggest - maybe use there is increasing? What I haven't seen is any objection to the terms, and links to sources showing such objections will be welcome..dave souza, talk 22:23, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposal: a way forward?

message: This google search is fairly conclusive. DCAL, The Arts Council and the Ulster Scots Agency all use Norlin Airlann. Stu ’Bout ye! 18:26, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah well they're fairly conclusively WRONG then, aren't they? I'm 32 years old and all my life people write "NornIrond" whenever they wanna hilariously emphasize the actual indiginous Ulster Scots way of saying it. Why should we allow some civil service quango tell us how to spell our own language? --feline1 09:34, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Where did the D come from? I don't recall having ever seen it with a D, always as NornIron? Ben W Bell talk 09:45, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

text: By hilariously emphasise, you mean Eye dialect?  Are those people you know writing English or Ulster Scots?  If they are writing Scots, the spelling traditions are different and are not hilariously emphasising anything.  You can spell it how you like; but since the Ulster Scots language movement came up with the new word, they probably get first dibs on spelling it. I will put Norn Iron in the footnote, as it is a common piece of English eye dialect. Please do not mark a disputed change as minor edit'.  --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 10:01, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It would certainly please me to see "NornIron" there as a footnote, as it used regularly by tens of thousands of folk in NornIron as a spelling which reflects common pronunciation in everyday dialect (usually in jokey sentences about "craic", "yer man" and football etc etc). The ridiculous ulster scots neologism was just dreampt up by a fevered quango and barely merits being in the article.--feline1 10:07, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You have a point.  So, I won't complain that you used the Irish spelling of 'crack', reputedly an Irish borrowing from Scots <grin>.  --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 11:00, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

text: It seems that Scots Wikipedia agrees with neither of us, see :w:sco:Norlin Airlann.  --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 11:20, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes but I don't really care *what* Rab C Nesbitt says.--feline1 12:03, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Norlin Airlann

message: Why is .ie in italics, while .co.uk is not?
What is the reasoning behind this?
As far as I know .ie is an all-Ireland tld.
(Derry Boi 08:15, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But it's officially assigned to the Republic of Ireland, so why is it listed? I know registrations are accepted from NI, but that doesn't give it a claim to call it the ccTLD. For example .tk is available to anyone anywhere, but its not on every country's article. - Рэдхот(t • c • e) 17:03, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The .co.ni domain was created by the Nicaragua authorities for use in Northern Ireland. Shouldn't it be listed for the same extra-territorial reasons as .ie.? « Keith t/e» 17:16, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't know about .co.ni being "created by the Nicaragua authorities" - as far as I know, it is more the brainchild of a business man from Luton. .ie is explicitly 32 county. --sony-youthtalk 01:51, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:   is just a commercial domain name service using the Nicaraguan ccTLD - much as many others are. Type "nic" into , select "co" and see what you get. It's inclusion counts as advertising and it should be removed. Bazza 13:59, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Internet TLD 

message: The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
*Per WP:CONTEXT and WP:MOSDATE, months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.
*Per WP:MOS, avoid using words/phrases that indicate time periods relative to the current day.  See footnote
*Per WP:WIAFA, Images should have concise captions.See footnote
*Per WP:MOSNUM, there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 18mm, use 18 mm, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 18 mm.See footnote
*Per WP:MOSNUM, when doing conversions, please use standard abbreviations: for example, miles -> mi, kilometers squared -> km2, and pounds -> lb.
*Per WP:CONTEXT and WP:BTW, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006, but do not link January 2006.
*As per WP:MOS, please do not link words in headings.
*Please reorder/rename the last few sections to follow guidelines at WP:GTL. 
*Please alphabetize the interlanguage links.See footnote
*Per WP:WIAFA, this article's table of contents (ToC) maybe too long- consider shrinking it down by merging short sections or using a proper system of daughter pages as per WP:SS.See footnote
* article may need to undergo summary style, where a series of appropriate subpages are used. For example, if the article is United States, than an appropriate subpage would be History of the United States, such that a summary of the subpage exists on the mother article, while the subpage goes into more detail. 
*Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
**While additive terms like “also”, “in addition”, “additionally”, “moreover”, and “furthermore” may sometimes be useful, overusing them when they aren't necessary can instead detract from the brilliancy of the article. This article has 28 additive terms, a bit too much.
**Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant -  “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
**Temporal terms like “over the years”, “currently”, “now”, and “from time to time” often are too vague to be useful, but occasionally may be helpful. “I am now using a semi-bot to generate your peer review.”
*As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space inbetween. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]
*Please provide citations for all of the s.
*Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that the it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 2a. See footnote
You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Mal 12:39, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Auto Peer Review