Talk:Irish National War Memorial Gardens

Ratings

Present ratings are disputed Osioni (talk) 18:53, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Now uprated to C-class. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 03:20, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

forked

Irish participation in World War I should be forked into its own article —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.27.231.231 (talk) 06:04, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

World War 2 Memorial as well?

The article never makes reference to the fact, but the image of the Great Cross of Sacrifice shows the dates of both World Wars (or, I guess in this context, the Emergency). Should there be something in the article about this? I'm obviously not the most knowledgeable person on the subject so I can't say what would be appropriate. -- MichiganCharms (talk) 06:53, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Edits regarding speculated De Velera view

Changing this "de Valera's government still recognised the motives of the Memorial and made valuable state contributions to" to "Éamon de Valera, and his government still recognised the motives " in a section is given it as a personal opinion of De Velera's. As this section is unsourced this is not allowed. Also adding it continually is disruptive. Murry1975 (talk) 18:15, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Here's the edit I keep trying to make and you keep reverting [1]. Maybe I'm missing something, but perhaps you can explain how this relates to your apparent understanding of what's being edited, as shown above? If you read it carefully you'll see I'm just doing some minor grammar correction.Neil Edgar (talk) 20:04, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Really? Do you not read what you edit? Do you need me to show you again? Its pretty clear from my post above. There is a difference in meaning between "de Valera's government" and replacing it with "de Valera, and his government" in the sentence. If you would like to do something constructive, find sources instead of adding this "apparent" recognition by De Valera. Murry1975 (talk) 06:08, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Ah, selective extraction of the text. Here's some more. the Taoiseach, de Valera's government still recognised the motives of .... Now that IS bad use of punctuation at the very least, and for you to claim that de Valera's government endorsed something that de Valera himself didn't is preposterous. You are hair splitting in the extreme and using this to make a point. Of course de Valera recognised it. And for you to mention obtaining sources is verging on piss taking. There are no sources in the original version that you keep reverting to! So I might as well request YOU get sources. Finally, if you're so concerned about this, why didn't you just amend the specific part of my edit rather than a wholesale revert? You could, for instance, have tidied the punctuation to something like the government of Taoiseach de Valera, or put a comma in after 'government', but no, you had to take out some other basic copy editing as well. Says it all really. If there's no further comments on this matter after a day or two I'm putting it back. Neil Edgar (talk) 20:35, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Bad news for you, anything that gives information directly on a person has to be sourced, not as you put it "Valera's government endorsed something that de Valera himself didn't is preposterous". Stop with the uncivil comments and purely disruptive edits. Murry1975 (talk) 12:08, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Comments attributed to a person without RS are removed as per guidelines. Murry1975 (talk) 21:03, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Murry, are you sure you're not talking about information on a living person? I'm not aware of any guideline specifically dealing with the views of a dead person. Scolaire (talk) 10:43, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Scolaire we cant attribute veiws or beleifs from any living or dead person with a source that it was thiers. We cant enter any unsourced information on any article to do with a living person. Murry1975 (talk) 15:51, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

WP:V says we should not include any content that isn't attributable to a reliable source. Most of the content in this article is unsourced, which is why it is tagged. But what is the guideline that specifically says content about the views of a dead person cannot be stated without sources or that it must be removed? It is important to be clear about what the policies and guidelines do and do not say. Scolaire (talk) 08:59, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Casualty figures

The First World War death toll given here seems very high. 49,400 dead out of 300,000 Irish soldiers who served in all armies gives us a death rate of 16%. That is a higher proportion than Germany or France (both about 15%), Russia (14%), Italy (12%) and the UK as a whole (10%). My figures are from <http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/world-war-one/world-war-one-and-casualties/first-world-war-casualties/> If the figures are correct they are worthy of comment in the article. Peter Bell (talk) 00:55, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Irish National War Memorial Gardens. 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/20110515223110/http://www.webmatters.net/monuments/ww1_irish_mesen_1.htm to http://www.webmatters.net/monuments/ww1_irish_mesen_1.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130728041814/http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/eng/Historical_Information/1916_Commemorations/Irish_Soldiers_in_the_First_World_War.html to http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/eng/Historical_Information/1916_Commemorations/Irish_Soldiers_in_the_First_World_War.html

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) 16:08, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Irish National War Memorial Gardens. 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/20080807010613/http://www.heritageireland.ie/en/Dublin/WarMemorialGardens/ to http://www.heritageireland.ie/en/Dublin/WarMemorialGardens/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110726090403/http://www.combined-irish-regiments-oca.org.uk/ to http://www.combined-irish-regiments-oca.org.uk/

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) 19:20, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Linkcruft

Per WP:EXTLINK I removed links to external sites which are commemorating Ireland in WW1, or veterans' associations, or general history articles. Osioni reverted with comment reinstate some relevant WWI ext.-links. Is not merely a "garden" memorial. It's a memorial garden, not a garden memorial; does "merely" imply it's something else as well? If so, what? The same low-value links are copy-pasted on many other pages and cluttering them up. Most of the links should be on one or zero articles.

Website	Page to extlink on	Comments
Department of the Taoiseach: Irish Soldiers in the First World War	Ireland and World War I	Not much info beyond what's already in the Wiki article
The Military Heritage of Ireland Trust	Ireland and World War I	McAfee Advisor warning. Redirects to [2]. May have some relevant articles but site appears to have been hacked with spam ads. Bibliography page would be useful if it weren't broken.
The Irish War Memorials Project – listing of monuments throughout Ireland	Ireland and World War I	Deeper link to Wars or WW1 sites and WW1 people
Dublin Memorials of the Great War 1914–1918	Ireland and World War I	McAfee Advisor warning. Self-published
Homepage of the Connaught Ranger's Association	Connaught Rangers	Misspelled
Homepage of the Royal Dublin Fusiliers Association	Royal Dublin Fusiliers
Homepage of the Royal Inniskilling Fusiliers Association	Royal Inniskilling Fusiliers
Homepage of the Royal Munster Fusilier's Association	Royal Munster Fusiliers	Misspelled
Homepage of the Waterford Museum: WWI and Ireland	History of Waterford	Linkrot. Now at [3]. General info is already in relevant articles. Some Waterford-specific info.
Homepage of the Bandon War Memorial Committee	-	Minor local association with ancient basic website
Homepage of the Combined Irish Regiments Association	-	Linkrot. Now at ciroca.org.uk and nothing of general interest there.

jnestorius^(talk) 02:15, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Sources

I've gutted some of the further reading section in preparation for (I hope) a major overhaul. Putting this here in case any of the books are useful later on.

• Thomas P. Dooley: Irishmen or English Soldiers? : the Times of a Southern Catholic Irish Man (1876–1916), Liverpool Press (1995), ISBN 0-85323-600-3.
• Myles Dungan: They Shall not Grow Old: Irish Soldiers in the Great War, Four Courts Press (1997), ISBN 1-85182-347-6.
• Keith Jeffery: Ireland and the Great War, Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge (2000), ISBN 0-521-77323-7.
• Bryan Cooper (1918): The 10th (Irish) Division in Gallipoli, Irish Academic Press (1993), (2003). ISBN 0-7165-2517-8.
• Terence Denman: Ireland's unknown Soldiers: the 16th (Irish) Division in the Great War, Irish Academic Press (1992), (2003) ISBN 0-7165-2495-3.
• Desmond & Jean Bowen: Heroic Option: The Irish in the British Army, Pen & Sword Books (2005), ISBN 1-84415-152-2.
• Steven Moore: The Irish on the Somme (2005), ISBN 0-9549715-1-5.
• Thomas Bartlett & Keith Jeffery: A Military History of Ireland, Cambridge University Press (1996) (2006), ISBN 0-521-62989-6
• David Murphy: Irish Regiments in the World Wars, Osprey Publishing (2007), ISBN 978-1-84603-015-4
• David Murphy: The Irish Brigades, 1685–2006, A gazetteer of Irish Military Service past and present, Four Courts Press (2007)
  The Military Heritage of Ireland Trust. ISBN 978-1-84682-080-9
• Stephen Walker: Forgotten Soldiers; The Irishmen shot at dawn Gill & Nacmillan (2007), ISBN 978-0-7171-4182-1

— HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:53, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

These look more suitable as sources for Ireland and World War I. This article does not need detailed descriptions of the participation of Irish solders in the war, except where they relate to the memorial. Verbcatcher (talk) 22:04, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I misinterpreted your post. I agree that most or all of these are not appropriate for the Further reading section. Verbcatcher (talk) 22:07, 10 May 2023 (UTC)