User talk:Eog1916

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bratsche^{talk | Esperanza} 22:24, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

Please do not remove speedy deletion tags from articles that you have created yourself. If you do not believe the article deserves to be deleted, then please do the following:

1. Place {{hangon}} on the page. Please do not remove any existing speedy deletion tag(s).
2. Make your case on the article's talk page.

Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. Turlo Lomon 13:00, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 License tagging for Image:Picturea 008.jpg 2 Your edit to English-medium college. 3 St. Columb's College 4 St. Columb's College 5 Gaelic mythology 6 English-medium article 7 Speedy deletion of 'Cultural assimilation' 8 Re-listing 9 India and Bharat 10 Irish (Gaelic) 11 Irish Republicanism 12 Help me 13 Dr Manmohan Singh 14 Image:Erigjpg.JPG 15 Northern Ireland talk page 16 Íomhá Chathail 17 E. San Juan 18 Comhar 19 AfD nomination of List of English medium Primary schools in Ireland 20 English language in Pakistan 20.1 Education of English in Pak again 21 English medium schools in Ireland 22 Pakistan British Council links 23 Irish Language in Northern Ireland 24 BBC 25 Taliban 26 English Medium Education article (again) 27 Oirish 28 Happy First Day of Spring! 29 Your comment 30 Re Ulster Scots and Ulster Gaelic Dialects 31 Gaelic literature 32 Speedy deletion of Gaelic literature 33 A suggested name change here 34 Image copyright problem with Image:Ascaill Naomh Pádraig.jpeg

[edit] License tagging for Image:Picturea 008.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Picturea 008.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 15:15, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your edit to English-medium college.

Your recent edit to English-medium college. (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 16:32, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] St. Columb's College

I've never ever heard of St. Columb's being referred to as an English-medium college before and I don't really understand why it should be called that. Could you explain to me what exactly such an institution is and why you believe St. Columb's ought to be classified as one? Thanks. Danny Invincible^Talk|Edits 13:12, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I find your labelling odd more than upsetting or anything like that. I have looked at your article but I still fail to see why St. Columb's should be considered as an 'English-medium school'. First of all; the article is rather sketchy in defining what exactly such an institution is. Secondly; as far as I'm aware, the college was not established by British Commissioners of National Education (who seem to have been the organisation building such schools), but, rather, by the Irish Catholic Church. Also; Gaelic is taught as a subject in the school and I would assume that it always has been, in contrast to the 'English-medium school' idea of teaching only in the English language. Danny Invincible^Talk|Edits 14:20, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Furthermore, St. Columb's was built in 1879, wheras your article claims that English-medium schools were built in Ulster up until 1870. Danny Invincible^Talk|Edits 17:34, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

St. Columb's is indeed an English-medium school in the simple sense that English is the primary language of communication within the school, but that is different from implying that it is an English-medium school in the British institutional sense with which your article deals. At the time the college was established, English was already the primary language of use in Ireland. Would you refer to a recently-established school in, say, Cork as an English-medium school in the institutional sense deriving from Britain's colonial expansion simply because English was the primary language used in the school? It would certainly be a de facto English-medium school by convenience, but that is not the same as the concept of the school being an English-medium establishment by principle that your article deals with. St. Columb's was not founded by the British for the purpose of aiding the spread of their English language in Ireland - it was set up by the Irish Catholic Church, and English just so happened to be the language used for teaching as it was the language used by the majority of Irish people in their day-to-day lives at the time. Besides, the prohibition on Irish being used in schools ended in 1871 - 8 years before the founding of St. Columb's. Thus, the matter of in which language to teach was within the discretion of those running the school - the Church. Danny Invincible^Talk|Edits 02:13, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] St. Columb's College

20:58, 19 January 2007 (UTC)~eog1916

I'm glad that you now admit that St.Columb's is an English-medium school, but I still fail to understand what you mean by " that is different from implying that it is an English-medium school in the British institutional sense with which your article deals." Perhaps you could expand on this further?

You then say "At the time the college was established, English was already the primary language of use in Ireland". Perhaps if this were true ther might have been an excuse to establish a seminary for the education of students for the priesthood through English but the facts would suggest otherwise.

It was in a remote country area, at Clady on the banks of the Finn in Urney parish, towards the end of the eighteenth century that Dr. Philip McDavitte, Bishop from 1761 to 1797, set up such a school. (ref: http://www.stcolumbs.com/Portal.aspx?tabindex=9&tabid=3692)

In the mid 18th century around two-thirds of the population still used Irish as their everyday language. However, by the close of that century, this number had declined to just over half. (2.4 million out of 4.75 million). 800,000 of these were monoglots.

By the time the British Government undertook the first language census in 1851, the number of Irish speakers had dramatically reduced to just over 1.5 million, or 23.3% of the population. A much higher percentage still was to be found in Donegal and Derry. It should be noted that the census was held after the terrible famine that swept Ireland, in which 1.5 million people died of starvation and another million were forced to emigrate.

You pose the question "Would you refer to a recently-established school in, say, Cork as an English-medium school in the institutional sense deriving from Britain's colonial expansion simply because English was the primary language used in the school?" What I am attempting to say is that English was used by the establishment in Ireland ( both Church and State) as a deliberate means of assimilation or as Douglas Hyde termed it Anglisization. ( See The Necessity for De-Anglicising Ireland http://www.gaeilge.org/deanglicising.html) In his article in the European Journal of Education Prof. Ó Buachalla states " During the first four decades of their existance, there is no mention of the irish language in the programme of regulations of the Commissioners of National Education; furthermore no provision whatsoever was made in 1831 when the original scheme was drawn up for education of those children who spoke Irish only. According to the official opinion of later Commissioners, expressed in a formal reply to the Chief Secretary in 1884, " the anxiety of the promoters of the National Scheme was to encourage the cultivation of the English language..." ( Ref: European Journal of Education,Vol19,1,1984. 'Education Policy and the Role of the Irish Language from 1831 to 1981.' URL http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0141-8211%281984%2919%3A1%3C75%3AEPATRO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-K&size=LARGE)

That this type of system of education should continue to the present day is perhaps due to the overall effectiveness of the original colonial policy and I would accept that it may not be done in a deliberative fashion but really its effects are esentially the same.

You initiated this debate with the sentence "I've never ever heard of St. Columb's being referred to as an English-medium college before and I don't really understand why it should be called that." I would suggest that the normalization of the use of English has its effects on you too!

You go on to write "It would certainly be a de facto English-medium school by convenience, but that is not the same as the concept of the school being an English-medium establishment by principle that your article deals with." Again one should pose the question why it is seen to be more 'convenient'?

You write "St. Columb's was not founded by the British for the purpose of aiding the spread of their English language in Ireland.."

You forget ar maybe don't appreciate that the British Government set up Maynooth College so that Catholic priests would be taught through English and when the National Schools were founded that only English was allowed between the four walls.

You further write "it was set up by the Irish Catholic Church, and English just so happened to be the language used for teaching as it was the language used by the majority of Irish people in their day-to-day lives at the time." The census of population (in 1851) of course does not back up your argument!

You write "Besides, the prohibition on Irish being used in schools ended in 1871 - 8 years before the founding of St. Columb's."

The Diocese establish the original seminary in 1761. I don't know what 'prohibition of Irish' you are refering to in this instance.

Finally you end thus "Thus, the matter of in which language to teach was within the discretion of those running the school - the Church. "

I totally agree, the RC Church willingly adopted the same policy regarding language as did the English Government and its agents in Ireland!

Slán go fóill Éamonn

St. Columb's is an English-medium school in the sense that the English language is the primary medium of education used. However, I would argue that that is as far as referring to it as an 'English-medium school' can go. My reasoning is that your article deals with English-medium schools as a form of anti-Gaelic, political or cultural tool employed by the British in Ireland during their past colonial era. It doesn't relate simply to the former, nor does it provide any substantial distinction. If your article also dealt with English-medium schools in their simplest, English-being-the-language-in-use form and you clarified this with distinction in relation to schools that were not established for the aforementioned purpose, I don't think I'd see a problem with referring to St. Columb's as such. Currently, your use of the loaded term in the St. Columb's article could very easily cause one to think that the continued use of English in the school is, and always has been, an attempt to stamp out the Gaelic language.

You refer to a school being set up at Clady in the late 1700s as if the modern-day St. Columb's is a direct continuation of that establishent. From the link you provide, you'll notice that its ultimate descendant seminary closed in the aftermath of the Famine. As has been mentioned, St. Columb's was established after English became Ireland's primary language, even though its founding may have been inspired by earlier English-speaking seminaries in the then mainly Irish-speaking area, but I don't feel that this is wholly relevant to this debate. You may argue that the continued use of English by religious and state institution was/is a continuation of this policy but, with Irish already 'stamped out' as the major language, I feel that may be stretching the application of the label somewhat. You seem to be well acquainted with the matter but I notice from viewing the page's history that there are others who also dispute your use of the term in relation to St. Columb's. Maybe I will try to initiate some form of debate on the St. Columb's College talk-page.

Although I would tend to agree with the following:

That this type of system of education should continue to the present day is perhaps due to the overall effectiveness of the original colonial policy and I would accept that it may not be done in a deliberative fashion but really its effects are esentially the same.

and I would concur that the continued use of English as a primary language in Ireland only contributes to the country's complete Anglicisation and serves to reinforce that of the process which has already occurred, I feel that the important distinction lies in the fact that the policy with which your article deals was a deliberate one (as you recognise) aimed at ridding Ireland of Irish while many, if not most, modern-day English-medium schools in Ireland make provision for the teaching of Irish while the State itself pledges protection for the language. They have no such intentions of ridding Ireland of Irish in contrast with the old English-medium system of the British.

I referred to the use of English being more convenient as it was the primary language of use in the city of Derry and Ireland at the time - that being 1879, and not 1851. Terming the college an 'English-medium' institution would nearly suggest that there is something uncommon in the fact that it functions mainly in the English language - as if teaching in English was not the Irish norm. If we are to be realistic, we must accept that there is nothing adnormal surrounding this in modern-day Ireland where English has become the primary language of use. I do admire your passion on the subject, but I feel that a lot of clarification is required. We can't simply refer to all schools which use English primarily under the ambiguous and politically-loaded (in the old sense) label of 'English-medium scool'. Being honest, the use of English in Ireland has been normalised. Of course, the history and development of this current state of affairs is noteworthy, but I don't think there is a real need to point out that St. Columb's is an English-medium school in an English-speaking country.

You conclude by confirming that the Catholic Church in Ireland also implemented the policy of Anglicisation. Perhaps you could expand on this in your article. If the Church employed such a policy officially in 1879, maybe I would agree that St. Columb's was set up as an English-medium school in the old sense to which your article relates.

In summary, I can see two distinct forms of English-medium school: the first being the type deliberately implemented by British colonialists and their agents in Ireland in order to stamp out the Irish language; and the second being that which is set-up for reasons of convenience in the English-speaking Ireland resulting from the former official policy and does not carry the intention of wiping out the Irish language. Unless you have something to prove otherwise, I am inclined to believe that St. Columb's fits into the second bracket. Danny Invincible^Talk|Edits 19:37, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Eog1916 16:22, 3 February 2007 (UTC)eog1916

RE: "St. Columb's is an English-medium school ...... is, and always has been, an attempt to stamp out the Gaelic language."

EOG: I added the words 'English-medium' simply to describe the college, not to depricate it in any way. Why you should fing my use of the term 'English-medium' loaded perplexes me, as I am simply saying that in St. Columb's the English language is the primary medium of education used. This is I'm sure you would agree factually correct. The recently published Independent Strategic Review of Education, carried out by Professor Sir George Bain for DENI mentions English-medium and Irish-medium schools in Northern Ireland ( http://www.deni.gov.uk/index/8-admin_of_education_pg/101-strategic-review-of-education.htm). The Irish-British Interparty Body ( http://www.biipb.org/biipb/committee/commd/90302.htm )stated in its report that;

" Problems of the status of Irish-medium education at secondary level were more acute outside Belfast. In Londonderry and in the border counties, there were Irish-medium primary schools but little provision for secondary education. Pupils often had to revert to English-medium schools at secondary level and parents were proving reluctant to commit their children to Irish-medium education at primary level if there was little prospect of its continuity."

You will notice the use of the term 'English-medium'.

I think that the problem you may be more to do with your own background, which has probably not taken notice of the existance of an 'Irish Gaelic-medium' sector in Ireland or Scotland. You view 'English-medium' as 'normal' and therefore not needing any differentiation or explanation.

To be continued! Eog1916 16:29, 4 February 2007 (UTC)eog1916

RE: " You refer to a school being set up at Clady in the late 1700s ...... I would accept that it may not be done in a deliberative fashion but really its effects are esentially the same."

EOG: I have no dispute with you over this paragraph!

RE:  " and I would concur that the continued use of English as a primary language in Ireland .....They have no such intentions of ridding Ireland of Irish in contrast with the old English-medium system of the British. "

EOG: The intentions of the Church and or State can be debated, I would just say that the process of Anglisitation has accelerated not diminished since the Free State was created. Ireland ( 26 counties) must be the only ostensibly independent state, that offers its native Gaelic speaking children, their own language as an L2 in the state school curriculum and examination system and their L2 language at only L2 level (This state of affairs does not pertain north of the border nor in Scotland or Wales.) The State has still to provide a 'Gaelic-Gaelic Dictionary' for Gaeltacht schools. I taught Science at Leaving and A level through Irish Gaelic without Gaelic Science textbooks. I see very little difference in past education policies and the present ones. The 'Murder Machine' is still going at full throttle.

RE: "I referred to the use of English being more convenient as it was the primary language of use in the city of Derry and Ireland at the time - that being 1879, and not 1851. Terming the college an 'English-medium' institution would nearly suggest that there is something uncommon in the fact that it functions mainly in the English language - as if teaching in English was not the Irish norm." EOG: My point was that not facility was afforded those who spoke Gaelic as their first language (L1), even when they accounted for the majority of the student population. Certainly it was more convenient for the authorities to impose English...they did not have to provide Gaelic-medium teacher training colleges, textbooks etc. Teaching in English became the norm because Gaelic-medium was not allocated funding by Church or State. RE: "If we are to be realistic, we must accept that there is nothing adnormal surrounding this in modern-day Ireland where English has become the primary language of use." EOG: I did not suggest that it was abnormal, just that it was a deliberate ( unjust) policy that drove the situation in this direction. RE:" I do admire your passion on the subject, but I feel that a lot of clarification is required. We can't simply refer to all schools which use English primarily under the ambiguous and politically-loaded (in the old sense) label of 'English-medium scool'." EOG: As I explained before, I have no desire to use loaded terminology or indeed give a onesided insight into this phenomenon. Rather do I wish English speakers ( in the main monoglots) to have an opportunity to learn and research this subject and eventually draw their own measured conclusions.

RE: "Being honest, the use of English in Ireland has been normalised. Of course, the history and development of this current state of affairs is noteworthy, but I don't think there is a real need to point out that St. Columb's is an English-medium school in an English-speaking country." EOG: To me ( by the way my mother was born in Fintown, Co Donegal and although her mother spoke Gaelic as her L1, she never carried the language further to her own children,) speaking Gaelic to my children and grandchild is the norm. They are all multilingual D.V.

Well can we agree to differ?

Indeed I am aware of the Gaelic-medium sector. My mother was taught in Irish and speaks the language fluently, while I know that there are such schools even in Derry. I edited your article in order to provide some clarification. As it stands, I don't think I would have a problem with you referring to St. Columb's as an English-medium college. In modern-day Ireland the use of English is the norm, whether you wish to recognise that or not. It would be unrealistic to deny the fact that English has become normalised, and I don't see how my background has any bearing on that. For example, it would be an extreme rarity to walk down a Dublin street a hear individuals conversing in Irish. I would almost describe such an occurence as an oddity under the current day's circumstances. Personally, I find the situation unfortunate that Irish should have been left to rot in its home-land. I also find it regrettable from a cultural perspective Irish society's general Anglophilia and that the English language continues to take centre-stage. However, those are opinions - not facts. Danny Invincible^Talk|Edits 00:56, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gaelic mythology

Hi Eog1916, I have redirected your recently created article Gaelic mythology to the article Irish mythology. If you are going to recreate the article you need to make it a unique article, rather than a copy of another. Thanks. « Keith ^{t/_e» 16:04, 17 January 2007 (UTC)}

^{Eog1916 20:54, 18 January 2007 (UTC)eog1916}

^{Dear Keith,}

^{My son went to study Computing in Coleraine!}

^{I understand that you have difficulty with my use of the term 'Gaelic' instead of 'Irish' in this matter....well let me explain.}

^{The people who spoke/speak the language which we term as 'Gaelic' ( Q Celtic) well predated the label 'Irish' and viewed themselves as belonging to a group of people or a society/nation which they termed 'the Gaels' ( Na Gaeil). They lived in a land which they termed Gaeldom ( An Ghaeltacht) which stretched from Caithness in the north of what we now call Scotland to Kerry in the south of what we now call Ireland.}

^{Their mythology was part of what we term Celtic Mythology and contains many elements common in P Celtic languages, Brythonic or Gallic and insular British mythology.}

^{It would therefore be better / more accurate to redirected Irish mythology to Gaelic mythology and not the other way around!}

^{Surely it is better that we rid our beloved Wikipedia of all perjorative or historically inaccurate terminology?}

^{Le deagh ghuí With good wishes Éamonn Ó Gribín}

^{Hi Éamonn, I don't really have a problem with the term 'Gaelic' (other than I can never seem to spell it right when typing). The problem with you version was that it was a carbon-copy of the Irish mythology. If you feel that the Irish mythology page doesn't do the subject justice I think that you should raise your, very valid concerns, on the article talk page.}

^{The/my problem with your solution is the 'incorrect' version still remained, which really doesn't help anyone. The best edits are achieved through consensus and are always factual. It is possible, if others feel the same way that the Irish mythology page can be moved to Gaelic mythology. Hope you understand, and keep at it! « Keith t/_e» 21:11, 18 January 2007 (UTC)}

^{Eog1916 05:58, 20 January 2007 (UTC)eog1916 Dear Keith,}

^{Thanks for the comments. The English version of Wikipedia is rather too ethnocentric for a World audience. I think that it is important that we refrain from using terminology that is politically or otherwise loaded. Many other language groups resort to using the English version as the template for their own versions and it is surely important that we divest ourselves of as mush of our anglophilic/phobic thoughts whilst composing articles! I spend most of my time on other language versions of Wikipedia ( mainly the gaelic version) and am not that well versed in the editorial end...please forgive me.}

^{Still think that there is a strong case for 'Gaelic Mythology' or even the more general term 'Celtic Mythology' and not 'Irish Mythology' just as there is a strong case for calling our native language in English, the 'Gaelic language' and not the 'Irish language, which is in my view perjorative and inaccurate.}

^{[edit] English-medium article}

^{Simply removing templates from an article does not make it any better!}

^{The first template deals with WP:Manual of Style, you should become familiar with how to write a Wikipeida article, this basically deals with headings and what is appropriate use of Wikipedia. For example there is never (in my opinion) a need to use an exclamation mark in a encyclopaedia - "The use of the term 'Irische language/toung' to describe the 'Gaelic language' of the people was presumably a deliberate insult!". I get the feeling that this article is more your interpretation the various sources rather than the facts of the issue of English medium education - "Many scholars have participated in lively (not to say heated) discussions of Phillipson’s claims". The article simply doesn't read like an encyclopaedic entry.}

^{The second template is in relation to WP:POV and your use of statements like - "The use of English-medium education as a political and cultural assimilation tool.".}

^{The third and final template deals with WP:Sources, You have provided many, many sources, but from what I can see many of them have not been mentioned within the body of the article. You should source statements like - "At the time people in many areas of Cornwall did not speak or understand English." with a relevant source. You should check out Wikipedia:Footnotes, this is the best way to source statements.}

^{On a completely unrelated note, it is usually common practice to sign (~~~~) your talk page entries at the end, not the beginning. Hope this helps with your article, thanks for reading. « Keith t/_e» 16:14, 4 February 2007 (UTC)}

^{eog1916Eog1916 16:33, 4 February 2007 (UTC) Dear Keith, Thanks for the advice, I will take ALL that you say on board...promise!}

^{[edit] Speedy deletion of 'Cultural assimilation'}

^{A tag has been placed on 'Cultural assimilation', requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:}

^{Exact duplicate of Cultural assimilation}

^{Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet very basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.}

^{For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. NipokNek 13:00, 18 February 2007 (UTC)}

• ^{Instead of creating this article, why on earth did you not edit English-medium? -- RHaworth 16:14, 18 February 2007 (UTC)}

^{[edit] Re-listing}

^{No word back from Stibbs, so I took the liberty of re-listing my new and improved version of 'English medium education'. Hope that you like it...if not please feel free to talk to me about it.Eog1916 21:40, 25 March 2007 (UTC)}

^{[edit] India and Bharat}

^{See Constitution of India [1] Eog1916 22:19, 25 March 2007 (UTC)}

[edit] Irish (Gaelic)

By replacing "Irish" with "Gaelic" or "Irish Gaelic" in links, you break them, because they no longer link to the article in question. The usual academic name for the language is "Irish", so please stop trying to change how Wikipedia refers to it. Thank you. —Angr 19:14, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Again: please stop pushing your opinion of how to call the language. The language is called "Irish" in academic literature, including encyclopedias. Other names can be discussed at Irish language#Names of the language, but within the article itself and in other articles, the language is correctly referred to as "Irish". This is especially true of Old Irish, which is quite literally never called "Old Irish Gaelic". Also, in the infobox, stop replacing "Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland" with "Ireland" in the "states" section. Ireland is not a state. —Angr 19:34, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Dear Angr, RE: "By replacing "Irish" with "Gaelic" or "Irish Gaelic" in links, you break them, because they no longer link to the article in question." Surely one can re-direct the link? RE:"Again: please stop pushing your opinion of how to call the language." Are you trying to be offensive by asserting that I am 'pushing my opinion' ? Eog1916 11:28, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Irish Republicanism

Eoghan, I notice you are more interested in Irish cultural nationalism but I was also hoping a good editor like yourselves would help out over at {{WP:IR}}

regards--Vintagekits 17:19, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid that you got me totally wrong. I'm not particulary interested in 'Irish Republicanism' or its like althoug I am very interested in historical events and personalities and ideas! I'm particularly interested in languages, education and the arts and in what brings out the best in people...but especia;;y in what unites people.

Eog1916 18:01, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Help me

Hi Eog1916. I am responding to the help me template you placed. I see the template but no question. The normal format is to place a specific question or problem and then flag it with the template. So I am removing the template for the moment since I don't currently see a question.--Fuhghettaboutit 18:44, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dr Manmohan Singh

You have been contributing long enough to know that creating Dr Manmohan Singh by copy and paste was pure vandalism. -- RHaworth 17:15, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Erigjpg.JPG

Hello, Eog1916. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Erigjpg.JPG) was found at the following location: User:Eog1916. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 03:13, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Northern Ireland talk page

Hi, Thanks for your edits to this page, I was somewhat taken aback at insightful comments being placed on wikipedia, its a welcome change from the pantomine trolling normally associated with this site! 81.99.65.122 19:21, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Íomhá Chathail

A Éamoinn, a chara, could you go to ga:Íomhá:Cathal.jpg and specify what free license you want it usable with (Public domain, GFDL, etc.)? I'd like to move it to Commons so other languages can use it in their articles on Cathal Ó Searcaigh, but it needs a specific license first. Go raibh maith agat! —Angr 15:49, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Ceart go leor, tá sé déanta: féach Commons:Image:Cathal.jpg. Go raibh maith agat! —Angr 06:18, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] E. San Juan

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of E. San Juan, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://facpub.stjohns.edu/~ganterg/sjureview/vol1-2/juan.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot 11:17, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comhar

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Comhar, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. Phgao 11:50, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of List of English medium Primary schools in Ireland

An article that you have been involved in editing, List of English medium Primary schools in Ireland, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of English medium Primary schools in Ireland. Thank you. --BJBot (talk) 00:39, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] English language in Pakistan

Well, English has always been an official language in Pakistan, so it has always been a second or third language for most Pakistanis throughout the decades. However, ever since the early 90s when foreign channels were made available to Pakistanis through satellite dish antennas, English changed from a language only the elite required to one that everyone needs to learn in order to get into competitive schools and to get good jobs. English is a status symbol in Pakistan - the more fluently one speaks it, the more respect one gets. Young people watch Hollywood movies and listen to American and British bands, and since around 2000 English language Pakistani music bands have started emerging. English language Pakistani channels and radio stations have started emerging. Listen to one such radio station here.

In my opinion, Pakistan is stuck in limbo as far as languages are concerned. People in rural areas speak one of the regional languages, such as Punjabi, Sindhi, Phusto or Baluchi etc and have little to no opportunity to come into contact with English. Until now, their kids only started learning English from grade 5. Even in middle school, they were unable to get off to a good start with the language because their teachers themselves had a very poor grasp of the language. This is also the case in most urban government schools. Complicating matters is the fact that Urdu is the mother tounge of only 8% of the Pakistani population, which means most kids have to cope with 2 foreign languages in school - Urdu and English. So until recently, a Pakistani kid grew up without a firm grasp in either English or Urdu. Now our country has to make a decision. Either change everything - the textbooks, the instruction, all government websites and documents - into Urdu, or make the teaching of English to all kids a priority. Since English is seen as a global language, the language of business worldwide, and by the Pakistani government as a huge advantage over other developing countries, Pakistan has decided to strengthen the position of English in Pakistan. I think it's the right decision. India has benefitted greatly from it's population being able to speak English well (or at least they think so, my American friends who get calls from Indian call centers don't seem to appreciate their accents haha).

So in conclusion, I'd like to say that despite the fact that we're slowly giving up our own language(s), that is the general trend worldwide. More Germans, Chinese and French people are learning English today than ever before. The sooner we make our general population fluent in English, the better for us - in terms of tourism, avialability of education resources, and the economy as a whole.

You asked for the opinion of a Pakistani who was one of the highest scorers in the English language O level exam in 2004. I may be a little biased in my assessment.

Cheers Zaindy87 (talk) 16:04, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Education of English in Pak again

I noticed you reverted my deletion of the news of conversion of colleges to English-medium in Karachi. This news really is no big deal. Certainly not enough to merit mention on the main Pakistan article. There are thousands upon thousands of English-medium institutions in Pakistan. Addtion of 18 more certainly dosen't change the big picture, does it? Main country pages are for summaries, with specific info and quotes being added to the relevant daughter articles. The tone and material that you replaced is certainly not appropriate for a country FA. Please consider re-phrasing the section, to include info on English-medium education in Pakistan as a whole instead of this particular instance. No need to mention that English is being taught from an earlier age now than before.

Cheers Zaindy87 (talk) 18:59, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] English medium schools in Ireland

Dear Eog1916, I'll leave this comment on your talk page in reply to a comment you made on my own, so that you are notified sooner of its arrival.

With regards the deletion of a page you created, there is a link to the deletion discussion on this talk page (please see above) The voting count was 6 keeps, 2 keeps with conditions and 6 delete votes. You should be aware that its not a simple count of votes, but a general discussion. The conditions that came with 2 keep votes were that the list be renamed or that the list cover the Republic of Ireland as well.

As you were not willing to add any schools from the Republic of Ireland and that there were separate lists for Primary Schools on both sides of the border, which is logical given the different education systems they exist under, your list was largely redundant. Alastairward (talk) 09:09, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Alastair for the info. Unfortunately I was otherwise occupied on matters slightly more urgent than English Wikipedia and by the time I had a chance to get back, the debate had ended..mea culpa. I will try to make up the list again and include both parts of the country, by the way, this was my initial intention.

Is there something wrong with 'English medium schools in Ireland' as a title? Eog1916 (talk) 18:34, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Eog1916, please be aware that trying to recreate an article that was deleted, will mean that it can be speedily re-deleted without any of the debate from the first time around. The list was redundant as most schools in Ireland and the UK use English as the medium of teaching (which seems a redundant thing to point out in itself, since the vast majority of people speak English and few can be said to speak Irish only).

If you want your original article to be reinstated, you'll have to have the other two articles that replaced it deleted too Alastairward (talk) 16:39, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Pakistan British Council links

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Pakistan. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Alastairward (talk) 20:19, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Irish Language in Northern Ireland

Political theory is not like scientific fact, you can have opinions and not fact. It seemed a bit much to devote an entire section of the article to one paper by an academic and to lift wholesale text from it without quote it properly Alastairward (talk) 20:52, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Dear Alastair,

You have made the statement ; "Political theory is not like scientific fact, you can have opinions and not fact[sic]." Thanks , but I am already aware that a theory may not be factual!

And you go on; "It seemed a bit much to devote an entire section of the article to one paper by an academic and to lift wholesale text from it without quote [sic] it properly." I tried to give a synopsis of the article, as I thought that that was the best way to approach its contents. That you should find fault in my efforts saddens me, but I dare say I will get over it. I did however leave readers the URL so that they could look up the original article...as you have done! Eog1916 (talk) 01:52, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I take it from the addition of the [sic] tag you disapprove of my efforts to keep the neutral tone of the article. I have had to undo countless NPOV edits from you in the past, so this does not surprise me. I am not the only one to have found such fault with your additions to wikipedia, so I doubt you are surprised with my edits. Alastairward (talk) 21:23, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Dear Alastair,[Sic] is a Latin word meaning "thus", "so", "as such", or "just as that". In writing, it is placed within square brackets and usually italicized—[sic]—to indicate that an incorrect or unusual spelling, phrase, punctuation, and/or other preceding quoted material has been reproduced verbatim from the quoted original and is not a transcription error.<rwf>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sic</ref>. That you read any other meaning from its use I would suggest is a personal problem that you must come to terms with! I guess that you also class the use of [sic] as yet another NPOV which you feel duty bound to erase from the ether. Go bhfóire Dia orainn (Deo juvante)!

Eog1916 (talk) 22:11, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I know what it means, I was taught it in English classes at School (An English Medium school too no less!). So I take it that you weren't able to find any more compelling reason to complain about my edits than a misspelling.

But since we're speaking about copying material verbatim, I notice your article on the pamphlet "The Murder Machine", a piece that seemed to be a simple copy of the text of the leaflet, has been deleted, twice now apparently too. Alastairward (talk) 09:21, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Dear Alastair, You wrote "you can have opinions and not fact." Why I inserted the [sic] was simply to draw your attention to what exactly you wrote. My English teacher would probably have have advised me to write " you can have opinions but not facts". I know that it can sometimes be difficult for people to tell whether a statement is a fact or an opinion, thanks for reminding me. You seem to conclude (wrongly) that my use of [sic] indicates that I don't appreciate your efforts at keeping a neutral tone. This is not the case, and as I explained in my last comment regarding the proper use of [sic], I simply wanted to quote you verbatim.Eog1916 (talk) 10:01, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] BBC

What's BBC talk? GoodDay (talk) 22:39, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Interesting. GoodDay (talk) 22:53, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but have you come to any conclusions as to why? Eog1916 (talk) 10:02, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Taliban

Regarding this I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about - perhaps you could give an example of a diff? - What are you asking me to explain?

Pahari Sahib 08:15, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Dear Pahari, Regarding this [1]

Your erased the term 'taliban' and replaced it with 'mujahideen'. Eog1916 (talk) 09:53, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Dear EOG, I did not erase the term taliban - I undid your edit, which had two problems, a)Bad grammar (okay on talk pages but not on articles), b) spoilt a wiki link. You introduced a link to Civil War in Pakistan (2004–present) - an article which does not exist - this was the reason for undoing your edit - a reason which is apparent in the edit summary. I could ask you why did you erase the word 'mujahideen' and replace it with the word 'taliban' - why did you change "War in Pakistan..." to "Civil War in Pakistan..". You should have given some sort of reasoning in the edit summary or on the talk page. Pahari Sahib 10:08, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Dear Pahari, I do not hale from the Indian Sub-Continent, but am very interested in this part of the world and anxious to learn more about its peoples and history. I'm not an expert when it comes to editing in English Wikipedia but have always tried to use this media of expression in a proper manner. I would be grateful therefore if you could clear up some misunderstandings for me by answering the following;

• 1. explain where my English grammar failed me
• 2. tell me why the word 'mujahideen' is more correct to use than 'Taliban'
• 3. confirm that Baloch nationalist live within the state of Pakistan?
• 4. clarify whether or not the 'Baloch nationalist uprising' took place inside the borders of Pakistan
• 5.explain what you understand by the term 'Civil War'

Eog1916 (talk) 13:50, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay since you ask, regarding points 1&5 your edit stated "Currently, the military is engaged in a armed conflict with Islamic militants in the north-east of the country."

Now "a armed conflict" is bad grammar also the article Civil War in Pakistan (2004–present) does not exist - this was the reason for reverting your edits.

Regarding point 2 both are equally valid, the Taliban were formed from factions of the mujahideen and some the AQT are referred to as such today - but this wasn't my reason for reverting.

Regarding points 3-5 yes I agree that Balouch nationalists and rebels live within the boundaries of Pakistan but that this does not constitute civil war - it is not widespread enough - unlike say The Troubles which was much more like a civil war. But anyway I don't know why you are so fixated with the word Taliban? - My reasoning is clear from the edit summary. I hope this clears it up :-) Regards
Pahari Sahib 19:01, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] English Medium Education article (again)

Please refrain from making POV edits, especially when you mark them as minor edits or do not mark them at all. If you feel you have a reason for making the edits, state it in the summary box or discuss it on the talk page for the article.

In this case, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Myanmar are not parts of modern day India, so do not suggest they are so. Alastairward (talk) 11:43, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Dear Alastair, Thanks for pointing out my mistake whilst editing this article on the post colonial Raj. I had no intention of suggesting that Pakistan, Bangladesh and Myanmar were part of the modern Indian State. I have hopefully corrected matters now!

Eog1916 (talk) 10:00, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Not really, why not separate them as befits their status as sovereign nations? Alastairward (talk) 18:00, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Oirish

I would have thought that you would have had the courtesy to ask me about the article before you decided to remove it. It is a tongue in cheek article but it has/had serious intent. Eog1916 (talk) 16:10, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I am sorry if the editor that posted the CSD tag did not inform you as he should have. My job is to delete speedied pages based on their merits. Tongue in cheek articles, while humorous, do not have a place in the project. -- Alexf⁴² 16:15, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Who posted the tag?Eog1916 (talk) 22:32, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Guliolopez. -- Alexf⁴² 22:54, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Gracias! Even though I wrote in a humours mode I tried to impress upon the reader that the subject was serious. If you have read Jonathan Swift, you may appreciate that serious subjects can be approached in a light hearted way. In our language, we use the term 'idir súgradh is dáireach' ( between frivolity and seriousness) when we mix things up in such a manner. I would like to introduce this subject to English speakers and I think the term 'Oirish' is a legitimate slang term which has a certain street cred in ireland and even maybe abroad. Your advice would be appreciated.

I don't know anything about the Irish language. My advice has been preempted below as it has already been given. I would therefore advise you to read the indicated pages, especially WP:OR, WP:V and WP:NPOV. -- Alexf⁴² 00:18, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Slán y adios. Eog1916 (talk) 23:21, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Eamonn. Apologies for pursuing this, but I remain dismayed by your insistence on using the project to push your POV and OR in this way.

Firstly, while I accept that it may be used locally in your circle, there is absolutely no precedence for the application of the term "Oirish" to the language to any extensive degree. (Hence failing WP:OR, WP:NPOV, WP:SOAPBOX, WP:VER, and just about every guideline I can think of). "Oirish" is used in general terms to mean "fake or hollywood irishness", of the kind we see in films involving leprechauns and the like. It is not a term however that is used to describe the national language. If you have a source to support the use of the term "Oirish" to the "Caighdeán Oifigúil" (the official standard of spoken Irish), as you seem to be espousing, then please provide.

Secondly, I did advise you that I would be labelling the "Oirish" article for deletion. I did not do so here however, I did so on the project on which you started this SOAPBOXing campaign. See change here.

Finally, I note that you are still using Wikipedia to push Original Research and personal opinions. Focusing on the notion that the term "Irish" is a false or imposed label when used to describe the national language. In this change for example you note that the state "promoted the idea that the term Gaelic was pejorative and insulting", and that the term "Irish" is an "exonym". What sources can be applied to these assertions? You also include a statement that "English speakers ... are mostly ignorant of the historical background to the language". This statement is (yet again) shockingly generalist, uncited, and inappropriate in more ways than I can count.

Regards. Guliolopez (talk) 00:09, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Dear Gulio, No need for apologies! I wrote the article ,half in jest and half with a serious intent'. I will try to answer your various points in order; Firstly: If you look up 'Oirish' in Google you get a fair sample of its uses. The Gaelic speaker has other subtle understandings of the word but unfortunately the language barrier makes it difficult to explain these to you. Perhaps if you read the novel 'An Beal Bocht' which has been translated into English,( See: Flann O'Brien: The Poor Mouth, Dalkey Archive Press) you might get a feel for our complex linguistic situation vis a vis English. Secongly: Not sure what this means...perhaps you could take time to explain? Finally: ?? what you mean by " to push original Research"? Certainly the article reflected personal opinions but then I dare say that this is a human trait that is hard to constrian in a free society! My motive/hope was that the article would stop and make people think...that is all. Regarding my statement that the state "promoted the idea that the term Gaelic was pejorative and insulting", and that the term "Irish" is an "exonym". What sources can be applied to these assertions? You also include a statement that "English speakers ... are mostly ignorant of the historical background to the language". I still stand over these statements but it would take me some time to find suitable sources to cite and unfortunately I don't have the time to spend searching for such at present. I try to devote most of my free time expanding the Gaelic version of Wikipedia and I only venture into English Wikipedia when I feel that it needs more balance ...I feel that it is too weighted towards an Anglo American view of the World and that other ideas should be given a fair deal and not erased as some sort of heresy. Bon suerte!Eog1916 (talk) 13:12, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Éamon. This will probably be my last comment on this project on these issues. To your comments:

1. "The Gaelic speaker will have a subtle understanding of 'Oirish'" - Ignoring the patronising aspect of this comment, I will simply say that it is inappropriate to make assumptions about readership on the project. It's an open project.
2. "Read an Béal Bocht" - I have. In both the original and translated English versions. I can lend you either copy if you like. Regardless, again, the project is intended to be encyclopaedic and factual. Using a satirical fictional work as a kind of "source" for submissions is inappropriate.
3. "What does 'Firstly', 'Secondly', and 'Finally' mean" - These are linking devices used in English to separate arguments and deal with points in a logical order. I was simply using them to separate my points. (In the same way I am using bullet points in this edit to ensure clarity).
4. "I wanted to make people think" - In itself this is not an inappropriate intent. But, on this project, the manner in which you were attempting to do this IS inappropriate. As noted to you on the GA project, your intent would be better served by posting to a blog, writing a "letter to the editor" of your favourite daily, or similar. Using Wikipedia as a host for your musings is not appropriate.
5. "I don't have time to find supporting sources" - It is one of the basic premises of this project that contributors provide sources. You will likely have noted in fact that another editor has already tempered your unsourced POV and added "needs citation" flags to the changes you introduced to the Irish language article. Your changes will eventually be removed or altered if no source is provided.
6. "I devote my time expanding the Gaelic version of Wikipedia". As do I. As you know. However, I will apply the mores of the broader project just as diligently over there. Original Resarch, Essay writing and Personal Opinions are just as inappropriate on the GA project as they are over here.

Regards Guliolopez (talk) 14:28, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Dear Gulio, I'm sorry if I have offended you, that was not my intention. Sometimes I wish that we could use a telephone to discuss the likes of these matters!

Re:# "The Gaelic speaker will have a subtle understanding of 'Oirish'" - Ignoring the patronising aspect of this comment, I will simply say that it is inappropriate to make assumptions about readership on the project. It's an open project.

I simply suggested by this comment that native speakers of the Gaelic language may have different slants on issues particularly matters regarding their own cultural traditions; for instance the attitude of native speakers to those perhaps best termed as well meaning Gaeilgeoirs, who think that they know what is best for the survival of the Gaelic language/community. I suppose it is the feeling that one has when one is being 'talked down to' or simply being patronised. My suggestion that An Béal Bocht might give one an insightinto this phenomenon was made in good faith and was not in any way meant as a put down or the like. I did not suggest that it be used as a source.

RE:# "What does 'Firstly', 'Secondly', and 'Finally' mean" - These are linking devices used in English to separate arguments and deal with points in a logical order. I was simply using them to separate my points. (In the same way I am using bullet points in this edit to ensure clarity).

I think that you have misunderstood my use of these titles for my previous answer. I know why they are used / why you used them, and I did not have a problem about it...but for some reason you have. Once again I'm sorry for the misunderstanding.

RE:# "I wanted to make people think" - In itself this is not an inappropriate intent. But, on this project, the manner in which you were attempting to do this IS inappropriate. As noted to you on the GA project, your intent would be better served by posting to a blog, writing a "letter to the editor" of your favourite daily, or similar. Using Wikipedia as a host for your musings is not appropriate.

I know that I was sailing close to the mark but I thought that you and other readers would derive some amusement out of the article although it had also some serious content as well. I hoped that it would be left up on Wiki for some limited time and that it would generate some debate. I did not post it to cause difficulty an am sorry that my bone fides in this matter is disputed. I think Wiki is a wonderful resource and I have attempted to attract as many of my friends as is possible to read and participate in the project.

RE:# "I don't have time to find supporting sources" - It is one of the basic premises of this project that contributors provide sources. You will likely have noted in fact that another editor has already tempered your unsourced POV and added "needs citation" flags to the changes you introduced to the Irish language article. Your changes will eventually be removed or altered if no source is provided.

Unfortunately I am telling the truth re my free time and I am also conscious of your time as well!

RE:# "I devote my time expanding the Gaelic version of Wikipedia". As do I. As you know. However, I will apply the mores of the broader project just as diligently over there. Original Resarch, Essay writing and Personal Opinions are just as inappropriate on the GA project as they are over here.

Ní fiú domh morán eile a rá. Tá brón orm nár bhain tú sult nó taitneamh as an t-alt mar bhí sé i gceist agam go mbeadh 'idir súgradh agus dáirire' ann. Ar scor ar bith, beannachtaí na Féile Pádraig ort.Eog1916 (talk) 15:48, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Happy First Day of Spring!

[edit] Your comment

I'm not sure what you intended to say, but anyway

• 1)My name is not Alister
• 2)Northern Ireland's national anthem is GSTQ. The soldier song is the National Anthem of the Irish Republic
• 3)Londonderry Air is referenced as a de facto anthem.

Traditional unionist (talk) 23:38, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the mistake over your name. Could you please explain to me why you think that GSTQ is the NI national [sic] anthem? Has County Down got GSTQ as its national anthem also? If you look at the England site, one does not get GSTQ as the national anthem..please explain? Amhrán na bhFiann (The Soldiers Song) is the national anthem of the State called Éire or Ireland and I am Irish ( carry an Irish passport ) and consider it my national anthem. I dare say that you have a problem with somebody born in stroke city who considers himself to be Irish and not British...but c'est la vie! If you consider yourself British, good for you. I have no problem with you considering GSTQ as your national anthem either, however it is factually incorrect to say that it is the national anthem of Northern ireland or of England. By the way, it is also factually incorrect to say that Amhrán ana bhFiann is the national anthem of Northern Ireland! But then I did not say that. Eog1916 (talk) 23:59, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

It is not the Northern Ireland National Anthem. It is the National Anthem of Northern Ireland. Not specific to, but it is so by virtue of Northern Ireland's membership of the United Kingdom. That is verifiable fact.Traditional unionist (talk) 00:21, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Dear TU,

Yes, and do you extend this 'logic' to County Down also?

What about England?

Eog1916 (talk) 10:27, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Clearly, yes. The national anthem of the country that contains Co Down, is GSTQ.Traditional unionist (talk) 11:15, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Clearly then County Down must be a 'nation' if it has a national anthem! You did not explain the case of 'England'.(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/England)..on wiki it states that" No official anthem specific to England— the anthem of the United Kingdom is "God Save the Queen". See also Proposed English National Anthems." Given that the largest country on your 'mainland (England)' has no official anthem, where did you get the idea that Co.Down or even Norther Ireland has a national anthem?Eog1916 (talk) 09:56, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re Ulster Scots and Ulster Gaelic Dialects

I hope you're not assuming that I'm the only one to find fault with your edits (see above) but with regards the notion of dialect vs language, the comment left by Traditional unionist on his talk page is one I agree with Alastairward (talk) 16:41, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

He who is without sin..Eog1916 (talk) 10:00, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Casts the first edit? Alastairward (talk) 11:04, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Very good!Eog1916 (talk) 12:44, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

But then, we are all sinners!Eog1916 (talk) 19:52, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Whoda thunk it - I agree with the comment too!!;)Traditional unionist (talk) 19:58, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Gaelic literature

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Gaelic literature, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.bartleby.com/65/ga/Gaelicli.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 00:39, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Gaelic literature

A tag has been placed on Gaelic literature requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later." You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. CiTrusD (talk) 00:40, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A suggested name change here

I think you might be interested in. I have suggest changing "Constituent country" to "Constituent area", since Wales is a principality, and N.Ireland is a province, not a country. To remain neutral, and as correct as possible, "constituent area" would be more correct, and without point of view. cheers. Gozitancrabz (talk) 11:55, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Ascaill Naomh Pádraig.jpeg

Hi Eog1916!
We thank you for uploading Image:Ascaill Naomh Pádraig.jpeg, but there is a problem. Your image is currently missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. Unless you can help by adding a copyright tag, it may be deleted by an Administrator. If you know this information, then we urge you to add a copyright tag to the image description page. We apologize for this, but all images must confirm to policy on Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks so much for your cooperation.
This message is from a robot. --John Bot III (talk) 17:13, 27 April 2008 (UTC)