Talk:Cassi

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Much of the material added by PsychoV appears to echo the speculative or fictional material created for the Europa Barbarorum mod for Rome Total War. PsychoV is also the forum nickname of one of the team who created the mod. Is this an attempt to make the Wikipedia entry resemble their version of history? Paul S (talk) 16:59, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Now it's just the facts, seems a pretty pointless article. :-)--Doug Weller (talk) 19:35, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

The material added by PsychoV echos the material cited by several recent sources, least of which includes research from the University of Dublin and that of O'Hogain, as referenced. It is no more "speculative or fictional" than any like summation dealing with other ancient peoples, places and material cultures.

Further, any perceived likeness or association with the aforementioned “mod” is consequential to the pre-existing data and not a subsequent endeavour to add credibility there-in. If the former poster / editor has a personal problem with the aforementioned mod or persons so involved, they should avoid employing their personal bias as a plum line by which the value of data is measured. If such an individual has information that proves the stated scholarly hypothesis to be false, I encourage he/her to post the said information.

[[User: PsychoV] (talk) 17:09, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia doesn't work that way, you have to have reliable sources and verifiable. 'several recent sources' are not something anyone can verify. O'Hogain is a folkloreist, which is a reputable thing to be but doesn't make him an expert in ancient history, archaeology, etc.--Doug Weller (talk) 09:58, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Just to clarify another point of confusion, yes O'Hogain lectures in Irish folklore at the University College of Dublin, but I believe it a grave injustice to merely dismiss him as "folkloreist". More correctly he should be regarded an historican, and if one is familiar with the ongoing contention between the two disciplines of archeology and history, one would be well aware why those who focus on the material culture are more reluctant to accept the hypothesis of others facilitated by alternate forms of evidence.--PsychoV(talk) 12:47, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Dr. Ó hÓgáin is not a historian because he wrote a general introuductory book; he doesn't claim to be and the blurbs on his books don't make any such claim either. Read his biog on Irish Wikipedia [1] The relevant section in the second paragraph means "an MA in Gaelic Language and Literature and a PhD in folklore" Paul S (talk) 11:30, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Plus of course he doesn't mention the Cassi at all, and his other statements about the various 'Casses' are not referenced and are speculation by him.--Doug Weller (talk) 15:15, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dáithí Ó hÓgáin

It turns out that he does not, as Psycho suggested, mention the Cassi.[2] (which is sadly unreferenced. Found some interesting but not helpful in the end discussions at the Totalwar forum, eg [3] but I've now edited the article to show what we know plus what good sources say may have happened.--Doug Weller (talk) 13:02, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid you're in error Doug. The Cassi, or Casses as he prefers to call them, are indeed mentioned. Please check your assertions before jumping to conclusions.--PsychoV(talk) 12:42, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I read it, he does not mention the Cassi. You think he does, because you identify the Cassi with his Veliocasses, Baiocasses, Viducasses, Tricasses, or Vadicasses but that's your personal interpretation. And in any case, he gives no references and he admits he is only speculating by using the word 'likelihood'. You presented his speculation as fact. But the bottom line is that he does not mention any tribe called Cassi and thus he can't be used as a reference for the Cassi.--Doug Weller (talk) 07:35, 15 May 2008 (UTC)