Talk:Ian Malone

Untitled

• • • This article should be deleted. Ireland is not a party to the Iraq conflict and that a former Irish citizen mercenary died there is of little consequence.

Made a number of changes. At no time has there been an age limit of 22 to join the defense forces. As we do not know why Malone was rejected we should simply state that he was rejected. Large numbers of people from Dublin do not join the British army. That there was a tradition of doing so at one time is irrelevant and unencyclopedic. The Irish guards were not founded because large numbers of Irish people served in the boer war. Large numbers of people from the republic don't serve in the Irish guards.

The inclusion of the statement from parents is not encyclopedic. The remark that at one time he wished to join the French Foreign Legion is unsupported. The defense forces were NOT officially represented and no evidence is presented that the gardai were officially represented (and indeed they could not have been). The tone of the artice is more like a fansite. Unencyclopedic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.125.183.106 (talk) 22:52, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

I would like to point out an error in the article on Ian Malone. I knew Ian personally, I served with him in the FCA. He was not rejected by the Irish Army on age grounds, he was rejected because the Army was not recruiting at the time. The upper age limit for general service recruits at the time was 28, so Ian would have had no problems getting in had there been a space there for him.

-FM

From VfD

• Ian Malone - Doesn't belong here if Jamie Murphy (soldier) doesn't belong either SD6-Agent 04:57, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • It's a shame to delete it, because it is well written. But, in the end, it is nonencyclopedic, and needs to get the cut. →Raul654 05:12, Feb 3, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete, Wikipedia is not a memorial site. RickK 05:16, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Remove, but someone keep a copy for if/when "wiki obituaries" gets started. --Carnildo 07:25, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • delete, nonfamous. --Jiang
  • keep, wikipedia is not paper. Vfp15 06:24, Feb 3, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete not encyclopedic. Bmills 12:41, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. While there are simliarities with the Jamie Murphy (soldier) article I don't think they should be treated in the same way. We don't need to have a black and white rule regarding whether every set of people should be included. Ian Malone is different from Jamie Murphy, for example, in that he was the first Irish fatality of the conflict. It is also difficult for us to judge the effect that similar events have on different nations, it's entirely possible that Ireland was more affected by this than Canada was by the death of Jamie Murphy. In a more general sense, an event which happens in say, the US, may be considered much more minor by the US population than it would be by the Welsh population if the same event happened in Wales. We can't have one set of rules governing everything as different groups of people will find different things important. So I think this article should stay. I should probably also mention that I found this article genuinely interesting, there is well researched information on his childhood/life/death/funeral, including reference to the fact that politicians from different parties attended the funeral, a quite rare example of Irish politicians putting aside their differences for a short period. I just think it would be a shame to lose this considering some of the inane rubbish which is happily kept on here. -- Ams80 20:11, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Jamie Murphy (soldier) does belong here. Anthony DiPierro 21:31, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Why do they belong here but the victims of 9/11 do not? What makes either of them an encyclopedia article? Why can't I list my grandfather, who fought in WWI or my father, who fought in WWII?RickK 02:13, 4 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • The victims of 9/11 do belong here. What makes them encyclopedic is that they are people. You can list your grandfather, but please include references on the talk page which make it easy to verify the information you provide. Anthony DiPierro 02:27, 4 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • They can be distinguished from individual September 11 victims by their effect on the countries concerned. Individual September 11 victims do not raise the same political questions as the first combatants to die in a conflict, who always provide an opportunity for the political opposition to further oppostiion to the situation. It's not so much about the individual as about the situation. Jamesday 11:39, 7 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Move to sep11wiki which will become Wikimorial in the next month or two. --mav
  • Delete. The person wasn't particularly notable before his death, and the fact that he joined thousands of other non-notables upon his demise doesn't make him encyclopaedic. Shall we also have individual articles for every soldier killed during WWII? Psychonaut 14:49, 4 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete, but keep a copy for when a wiki obituary is started. Wile E. Heresiarch 07:23, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Move to wikimorial. Speaking of which, is that getting off the ground soon? --Delirium 00:18, Feb 7, 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep both this and Jamie Murphy (soldier), the first casualties from each country in the operation concerned and hence the ones which test the political will and mood of the country to continue participating. These aren't solely personal obituaries and are more significant politically than articles on things like single ships or small units. Wikimemorial may want a personal memorial article which doesn't also cover the significance in context. Jamesday 11:34, 7 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep for the reasons Jamie Murphy (soldier) was kept but add an inclusion dispute notice. Angela.
  • I just found this weirdly included page via Wiki's 2003 deaths page; and now also urge its deletion. Beingsshepherd (talk) 04:19, 24 February 2013 (UTC)Beingsshepherd

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Ian Malone. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110629132538/http://archives.tcm.ie/irishpost/2004/08/10/story852.asp to http://archives.tcm.ie/irishpost/2004/08/10/story852.asp
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.britishcouncil.org/spain-society-britain-ireland-lives-entwined.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101126074030/http://military.ie/careers/booklets/genservice-eng.pdf to http://www.military.ie/careers/booklets/genservice-eng.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061014071823/http://www.operations.mod.uk/telic/malone.htm to http://www.operations.mod.uk/telic/malone.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:28, 24 May 2017 (UTC)