Talk:Timeline of the Irish War of Independence

Suggestions

Can I make a few suggestions?

First, Wikipedia is telling us that this article may be too long. A lot of this length is the result of including many very minor skirmishes. Although this accurately reflects the nature of the conflict, perhaps it would be better to leave out little-known incidents that do not meet some kind of minimum casualty number--say, the deaths of three ordinary people, or the death or capture of an officer. That would let us slim things down a bit, and still hit the highlights.

Second, Richard Abbot has published an excellent reference work, Police Casualties in Ireland 1919-1922, which lists every policeman and auxiliary killed in the War of Independence. I have revised a few entries after checking them against Abbott, and I suggest others do the same.

Third, I have tried to add some information about important British political decisions and events, like the failure of the Summer assizes in 1920, the Cabinet meeting of 23 July 1920, the Restoration of Order in Ireland Act, and Black Whitsun in May 1921. I think that more information of this kind from the Republican side would be more useful than more details about ambushes and assassinations. --Cliodule 16:13, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Clodule, good work on this article so far.

Re the length of the article. The 32k limit is only a guideline as certain browsers, my own included, cannot edit articles over this length in full. However many articles go over this limit and this one is only slightly over it. I do not feel that this article should be cut down from its present state.

Re the second point. The purpose of this article is to catalogue the events of the War of Independence. Most of these events were on a very small scale and this article should reflect this. If we were to apply a rule of only listing incidents where only three people were killed this would not only distort the picture, it would also mean leaving out seminal incidents like Soloheadbeg, where two RIC men were killed. Another advantage to this approach is that it means that much of the detail that still clutters the main article can be removed and moved to here. The main article, not this one, should confined to "highlights". Regarding political developments, I have nothing against their inclusion here, but I feel that wide-ranging or analytical points are better made in the main article.

Re the Police casualties, I have got most of my information from Michael Hopkinson's "Irish War of Independence", if his figures are found to be incorrect, then I have no problem with them being changed.

Jdorney 17:53, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

• Well, if the length of the article isn't a problem, then it isn't a problem, and there's no reason to limit what we include.--Cliodule 21:00, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Cleaning up this article

The Wikipedia:WikiProject Irish Republicanism has listed this article for cleanup, which includes: grammar, style and content. I've volunteered to help with the process but don't want to get into pissing matches with the current editors involved here. So if there are some sensitivities, then I'd like to know about them so I can determine whether I can help or should pick another project. One immediate problem which I see is an annoying inconsistency between present tense and past tense in the narrative(s). My preference for an encyclopedia is to treat the past as past and the present as present, although there are those among us who think that speaking in the present tense enlivens the topic. Personally I think that this ceases to have an effect after the third grade. Clean up will be a time consuming project so if it means battle and reversions, I’ll move on to something else. Any comments? --Kevin Murray 21:03, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

It's not a particularly active article from what I've seen Kevin, only a dozen edits this year so I don't think there will be any problems. One thing you might not be aware of is that the counties need capitalising, for example county Clare becomes County Clare. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 21:06, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I wasn't aware of the County issue and I will work on that too. Any other advice will be appreciated. --Kevin Murray 21:10, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Well forgive me if I'm stating the obvious, but just to try and improve some of the slightly stubby sentences. For example:

29 June 1920: IRA ambush in Ballina, north Mayo. One RIC man killed, one wounded.

Would become something like:

29 June 1920: One IRC member was killed and one wounded in an IRA ambush in Ballina, north Mayo.

But I'm sure you knew that already. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 21:13, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

No worries. It is good to clarify. I don't awnt to be overly wordy, but it would be nice to have sentences rather than note-speak. --Kevin Murray 21:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Questions

Regarding the Limerick Soviet section: (1) Is "Limerick Soviet" the name of the strike? (2) The sentence: "The response was a general strike and boycott of the troops." seems ambiguous to me. --Kevin Murray 22:21, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

According to the Limerick Soviet article that's what the press called it. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 22:31, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

• 23 June 1919: RIC Detective Hunt was shot dead by IRA man Jim Stapleton in Thurles, County Tipperary. Jim Stapleton had been selected to shoot D.I. Hunt, but actually missed his shot wounding another man in the knee. D.I. Hunt was subsequently shot in the ensuing chaos with a pistol at close quarters by one James Murphy. THIS SEEMS CONTRADICTORY WHO ACTUALLY KILLED THE MAN?

By my reading of it, Stapleton wounded another man, and Murhpy shot D.I. Hunt. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 22:33, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Try: *23 June 1919: RIC Detective D.I. Hunt was killed in a gun battle with IRA men Jim Stapleton and James Murphy in Thurles, County Tipperary. Jim Stapleton had been selected to shoot Hunt, but missed his shot wounding another man in the knee. In the ensuing chaos Hunt was killed at close quarters by a shot from Murphy's pistol. --Kevin Murray 22:47, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Looks pretty good. Wish I had the time to sort it out myself, but there's that many IR articles in need of improvement and the majority of them rely on offline sources so it's an arduous and time consuming job which doesn't leave much time for the simple but time-consuming tasks. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 22:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I'm learning as I go. I just need a bit of help with the ambiguities. Thanks. --Kevin Murray 23:03, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Tense

Sorry I hadn't kept up with the spring cleaning of this article, but I don't agree with the recent change from the present to the past tense. This is a timeline article, and the norm for such articles is that events are listed in the present tense. The idea is to show events unfolding as they happened, see for example Timeline of the Kashmir conflict for another example, among many.

Jdorney 13:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

As far as I'm aware all articles (with the exception of fiction) are written in the past tense, I've not seen any guidelines to say timelines or chronologies are any different. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 20:21, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Take a look at the articles here [1] for the precedent. timeline articles are usually written in the present tense, that's all. Jdorney 21:38, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

That's not a precedent. Guidelines state we write in the past tense. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 22:33, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok, we don't have a guideline set in stone, but what do YOU think and why? In my opinion timeline articles read better in the present tense, because the purpose is to lay out for the reader what was happening day by day. This is the way chronologies are almost always written in books. See, for example, the chronology at the end of Ed Moloney's 'Secret History'. Writing them in the past tense just feels wrong to me. Jdorney 10:11, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Writing about the past in present tense is a tool to "inject energy" into dull topics, and is most successful at the elementary school level or in light-weight treatments of history such as TV documentaries, or in periodicals. After a while though it becomes tedious and annoying, and few writers can pull it off well over the longer haul. There is a reason why we have past tense, and we should continue to use it as it is proper grammar. Re editing this has been a chore, so there is no reason to continue if this is going to be an argument over tense. --Kevin Murray 22:04, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry Kevin, but if you want to edit articles then you have to be prepared to discuss their content with other editors. Writing in the the present is not just a tool for enlivening dull topics or for kids who haven't learned the past tense, it's also the standard format for writing chronologies. Have a look at the chronologies carried in the appendix of many serious, not 'lightweight', history books and you will see some examples. This is not a narrative article, it is a chronology article. Its purpose is to list events as they happened on consecutive days and to accomodate information that will not fit in the narrative article. It is not intended to be read over the long haul. Jdorney 12:14, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I agreed to clean up this article if it didn't end up in a pissing match. Have at it! --Kevin Murray 15:14, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Well clean up according to whose standards? These are things that should be discussed, for example with the page's creators. It's not a pissing match, its a question of format. The wikipedia process can't work without reasoned debate. Jdorney 17:03, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

J, yes, do what you will. Please read my post above prior to starting this process. Clearly it's not binding on you. But I'm not interested in doing a lot of work which will be reverted. I'll move on to a different project. If you want to clean it up to your standards be my guest. I've been a bit busy to work on this for a couple weeks anyway. Good luck. --Kevin Murray 19:24, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

"Black and Tan troops"

Hi--I've noticed that this article uses the term "Black and Tan troops" in some places. This is a contradiction in terms. The word "troops" always means "soldiers". Though the term was used loosely to include the Auxiliaries as well, the Black and Tans were British RIC constables. Both the Black and Tans and the Auxiliaries were police, not soldiers.

And I'd just like to say that, while I have no objection to my entries being rewritten to put them in the past tense, in my experience, most of these types of chronologies are written in the present tense, to give readers the sense of events unfolding before their eyes. But that's just my two cents--like I said, I don't mind, either way.Cliodule 06:15, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

• I don't object to the proposal of changing the reference to troops. --Kevin Murray 00:38, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
• I disagree with changing to present tense. What once was clever has now become cliche and abused ad naseum. --Kevin Murray 00:38, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I've gone and changed the rest of the article to the past tense. As I argued above, I would have it in the present tense, but at least it's better than having it half in one tense and half in another. Re the Tans, yes technically 'constables' would be correct, but they were, in fact troops in all but name. So I don't think its a big error to call them that. Jdorney 23:57, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

No, I don't agree: I think it is in fact a very LARGE error to call them troops; it obscures one of the chief weaknesses of the Government's counterinsurgency strategy. As Charles Townshend pointed out thirty years ago, Soldiers are under military law and discipline. The Royal Irish Constabulary was not. Its constables were free to resign on a month's notice. Soldiers have no such freedom.

The British Government thought that, by reinforcing the RIC instead of the Army of Ireland, it could maintain the fiction that there was no war being fought in Ireland. They were so insistent on this point--that there was no war going on--that they refused to strike a campaign medal or clasp for soldiers who served in this conflict.

As we all know, this refusal to face reality blew up in their faces: police discipline was not enough to restrain the violence of BOTH Irish AND British police during the desperate summer and autumn of 1920; the Force's discipline was only restored by the flood of British recruits over the winter of 1920-21, which brought the RIC back up to strength, and by martial law and official military reprisals in the South. Even then, clear signs of police discontent arose again by the spring of 1921.

What's more, by calling them "troops," we obscure what Thomas Mockaitis has called the "Black and Tan syndrome" in the history of Britain's 20th-century colonial wars--the British tendency to rely on police and paramilitary units rather than the regular military--despite the tendency of such units to run amok and commit atrocities, for want of discipline and legal restraint. See the history of the Kenya Emergency for a particularly horrible example--or, for that matter, the later history of the Ulster Special Constabulary and Royal Ulster Constabulary in Northern Ireland.

--Cliodule 16:29, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Interesting points. If you feel it's necessary, please go ahead and change it. Jdorney 14:44, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

I was doing some cleanup editing in this article and added "troops" to the Black and Tan entries. But I have no problem with the change based on your concerns. --Kevin Murray 16:21, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

NPOV

This article has serious NPOV issues as do many articles on this subject. Many happening involving British brutality go unreferenced and weasle word are used throughout to make the British appear in an unfavourable light. These issues need to be addressed. 86.165.241.225 (talk) 22:04, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

A little known July 1918 ambush

Although most of Sean Patrick Lynch is likely not true, there's a mention of a July 1918 ambush in Co. Cork which does appear to have happened. This is before the ambush that is thought to have kicked off the war of independence. A caption in the photo archives of the Irish Examiner calls it "The first armed attack on the Royal Irish Constabulary to occur in Ireland since the 1916 rising". The facts appear to be:
On 7 or 8 July 1918 at Beal a' Ghleanna ("Mouth of the Glen") on the road between Ballingeary and Ballyvourney, two armed RIC men on a horse-drawn side-car who had been stationed to stop a feis being held, Bennett and Butler, were ambushed - one was shot in the neck, the other beaten, and police carbines and ammunition were seized. The ambushers were Jonny/Sean Lynch, Tadhg Twomey, Liam Twomey, Jamie Moynihan, Dan Tady Sweeney/MacSweeney, Neilus Reilly/Cornelius O'Reilly, Jer./Jeremiah O'Shea, as recounted in Mícheál Ó Súilleabháin's 1965 book, "Where Mountainy Men Have Sown". It was called "an attack calculated to shake to its foundations all sense of public security"[2] and was commemorated by Taoiseach Jack Lynch with Old IRA War of Independence veterans on 17 March 1970.[3]
Sources: Where Mountainy Men Have Sown by Mícheál Ó Súilleabháin, Chapter Four "The Mouth of the Glen", p39-45, 1965; The I.R.A. and its enemies: violence and community in Cork, 1916-1923 By Peter Hart, p62; No other law: the story of Liam Lynch and the Irish Republican Army, 1916-1923 by Florence O'Donoghue. Irish Press, 1954, p29; The Capuchin annual, 1968, p343; Examiner Photographs > Pictures from the Examiner Archive > ghleanna.jpg; http://homepage.eircom.net/~corkcounty/beal.html; http://www.ballingearyhs.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=45:ballingeary-volunteers-ballingeary-ira-1916-1920&catid=2:journal1996&Itemid=3; http://www.historyireland.com/volumes/volume5/issue4/letters/?id=113313.
Worth including a mention? Fences&Windows 09:07, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I wouldn't put it in this article, since it is really for the conventional narrative. I do think it's worth a brief mention in Irish War of Independence#Initial hostilities, though. Possibly after the account of Soloheadbeg you could say, "This was not in fact the first armed action after 1916; in July 1918..." Scolaire (talk) 06:23, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Aye, I'd considered that too. I'll put a brief mention there about earlier clashes, this book mentions a few alongside that ambush. Fences&Windows 18:36, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Nice job! Scolaire (talk) 07:44, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

UK

The state was the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and it's rather odd calling the Royal Irish Constabulary or indeed Constables Patrick MacDonnell and James O'Connell "British". While the term is colloquially used to refer to the UK, articles should be clear so I've modified the lead. . dave souza, talk 20:17, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

When was the last time you saw a news report referring to the "UK Army" or "UK troops"? It's not colloquial, it's standard practice in Britain and everywhere else to refer to "British forces". If you don't think Irish constables should be called "British" - and I see your point - then it might be better to delete "X state forces" altogether. That sentence is unwieldy as it is and the phrase adds nothing to it. The Tans and the Auxies were part of the RIC anyway! I'm reverting in the meantime because it just looks wrong as it is. Scolaire (talk) 22:35, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Agre that 'it looks wrong'. Also, at the time in question and later, the majority of newspaper reports books etc. used the term 'British' in reference to 'the opposing force'. RashersTierney (talk) 23:14, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

<ec> gulfnews : Gurkha services in UK forces to end, BUDGET 2012: UK troops will receive 'full' council tax relief while deployed | Mail Online, UK troops in major op to clear IEDs | British Forces News, The Press Association: UK troops support Afghan offensive. "British" is often colloquial, and correctly in the British Army as that's what it's called, but daft in the "British Royal Irish Constabulary". . . dave souza, talk 23:27, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

The phrasing is still a bit of a pig's ear. RashersTierney (talk) 01:49, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

It really is! Scolaire (talk) 07:49, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Referencing timeline events

I see that many entries to the timeline have no references, so how can their accuracy be confirmed? Parts of my contributions are being removed when they are clearly referenced. So why the double standards? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slogger3 (talk • contribs) 14:29, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

I read the linked newspaper reports, and I can see nothing in it to justify the statement: "They were killed, not for what they did, but for what they were deemed to have learned from their time in captivity." Somehow I can't imagine that the "correspondence from Army Finance Office concerning exhumation of the remains" will, either. Primary sources are not encouraged on Wikipedia, precisely because they are difficult to check. I reverted a previous edit of yours because it used emotive language, thereby introducing a POV into an article which should have an NPOV (neutral point of view). I agree with you that it would be preferable if all entries were referenced by reliable sources. It would also be better if the whole article was in either the present or past tense. Scolaire (talk) 13:13, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I accept these remarks and have made appropriate edits. (Slogger3 (talk) 09:47, 4 April 2012 (UTC))

cairogang.com

Is cairogang.com really a reliable source? It gives me an itchy feeling... The Banner talk 22:25, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Same here. It contains a lot of primary sources, fine in their place, but it is essentially self-published. RashersTierney (talk) 22:39, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Timeline of the Irish War of Independence. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120227183151/http://www.kildare-nationalist.ie/news/story/index.aspx?trs=kfididsnmh to http://www.kildare-nationalist.ie/news/story/index.aspx?trs=kfididsnmh

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:56, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Timeline of the Irish War of Independence. 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/20070905215654/http://www.dcu.ie/~foxs/irhist/june_1920.htm to http://www.dcu.ie/~foxs/irhist/june_1920.htm
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100330024621/http://www.dcu.ie:80/~foxs/irhist/march_1921.htm to http://www.dcu.ie/~foxs/irhist/march_1921.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120319151140/http://www.dcu.ie/~foxs/irhist/february_1922.htm to http://www.dcu.ie/~foxs/irhist/february_1922.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120319151311/http://www.dcu.ie/~foxs/irhist/march_1922.htm to http://www.dcu.ie/~foxs/irhist/march_1922.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120630192658/http://www.dcu.ie/~foxs/irhist/april_1922.htm to http://www.dcu.ie/~foxs/irhist/april_1922.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:31, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

More eyes needed...

With all due respect to the edits of User:Rms125a@hotmail.com, not all of them seem to be correct, neutral or relevant. So please take a look. The Banner talk 23:47, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

That's fine. I am very proud of my edits. I rv a considerable amount of confessional language and POV terminology and added details which I read about in books by Peter de Rosa and Tim Pat Coogan. Just ensure that the extra eyes are equally "neutral". Quis separabit? 00:56, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Is there a particular reason to doubt about that the extra eyes are equally "neutral".? The Banner talk 23:36, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

We all know (or should know) that certain topics inflame the passions. Quis separabit? 23:39, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Can you imagine that answers like that just make all the alarm bells go off? Assume good faith, please! The Banner talk 23:46, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

You're right. I should have said: "We all know (or should know) that certain topics inflame the passions, that's why I am around, to cool things down". I usually do assume good faith in general -- you're the one who opened this thread, and merely saying "With all due respect", doesn't change your "correct, neutral or relevant" comment. So far, I have not had one edit reverted that I have made. I am improving the article. Quis separabit? 17:01, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Also, just for the record I find the following references/sources to be unreliable:

• a) http://www.dcu.ie -- almost all dead links
• b) <ref name="Patrick J Brennan"/> -- unconfirmable claims, names ("Sgt Dummy").

Have you read the source (it is available online to read) and what are your reasons for disbelieving an IRA officer who took part in the Tan War and compiled a very detailed diary of events and categorizing it as unreliable? Future Research (talk) 16:19, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

• c) http://www.revolvy.com/main/index.php?s=Timeline%20of%20the%20Irish%20War%20of%20Independence -- mirror site/blogsite
• d) https://historywithatwist.wordpress.com/timeline-of-the-tans -- mirror site/blogsite.
  Quis separabit? 18:55, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Is it not amazing how many dead DCU-link you can restore to life with the Wayback Machine. 1919 is done by now.The Banner talk 21:48, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

All dcu links now replaced by working links. The Banner talk 02:48, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Did you remove both mirror sites? I can not find them in the article any more. The Banner talk 03:04, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Ow, and to my opinion "dyingforapint.blogspot.ie" is no a reliable source. No clue where this blog gets his info from. The Banner talk 22:22, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

I am an almost 52 year old man and, by today's standards, a Luddite -- I don't even know how to upload a photograph online or use Wayback or TW[inkle] or ROLLBACK, etc. And I am OK with that. BTW: did you hurt yourself? You wrote "Ow" immediately above, like the sound a person makes when the hammer hits their finger and not the nail. LOL. Quis separabit? 02:57, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

I am only hurt because I became aware of your prior community ban and the reasons for that. The Banner talk 09:02, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

"I am only hurt because I became aware of your prior community ban and the reasons for that." -- it was about a decade ago, dude, let it go. Forgive and forget and move on, you know, like "Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us, ..."
:::I know I cannot compare in terms of impartiality and neutrality and good will and lack of bias as, say, One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ or Sarah777 or Domer48. But please try to forgive me for my inferiority to these sterling editors. I am outta here. Do what you want with this article/timeline. I am removing it from my watchlist. Quis separabit? 17:02, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

If this is supposed to be a timeline of events during the Irish War of Independence then it should include all events relevant to the war. If all you want to include is casualties then maybe create a new page titled A Timeline of Casualties of the Irish War of Independence. Future Research (talk) 16:27, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Personally I think the Banner is being an nitpickity over-zealot here. There are other edits in this topic area that deserve greater scrutiny than what has been done here to a good editor like @Rms125a@hotmail.com:. Almost seems like an attempt to hound Rms125a out of the topic area. And not everyone is as clued in as you seem to be Banner. I have been on this site for over 10 years and am no way a Luddite but I have never heard of the Wayback Machine and have never used many of the more advanced or whatever features on this site or know what they are for. In regards to neutrality, where is County Clare Banner? Ireland or Ireland? Your user page uses the former and that can be easily construed by anyone as leaning to a certain bias so don't throw stones in glass houses. Mabuska ^(talk) 21:51, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

County Clare is in Ireland, which is on Ireland. The Banner talk 22:13, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

It is but people normally—and it is policy in encyclopedias and this site— locate smaller man-made land units to the next level of man-made land units not landmasses, unless of course your at the highest level of unit. For example Texas, USA, not Texas, North America. My point was that your wikilink was to the island not piped to the state, and that portrays the potential for pot calling kettle. Mabuska ^(talk) 22:34, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

A few words before "County Clare" I stated my nationality and that I am import on that island. And yes, I sometimes make mistakes. The Banner talk 01:25, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Doubtful edits

1. 23 June 1919: IRA volunteers Jim Stapleton and James Murphy shoot D.I. Michael Hunt, chief intelligence officer, in the back, in Liberty Square, Thurles, County Tipperary. Hunt died of his injuries the same day. Without a source, how do you know he was shot in the back? The Banner talk 19:18, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

   Per this reflink; so many names!! Unknown location has nothing to do with clear relevance to article. Quis separabit? 20:21, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

2. *4 July 1919: Sinn Féin, Irish volunteers, Cumann na mBan and the Gaelic League are declared illegal in County Tipperary. Why do you change Volunteer in volunteer (without a capital). Irish Volunteers is a name. The Banner talk 19:18, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

   For the same reason I write RIC constable, not RIC Constable. I can fix the Irish Volunteers, though. Quis separabit? 20:37, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

   A "constable" is a rank, "Irish volunteers" an organisation. The Banner talk 21:23, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

   Corrected it myself. The Banner talk 17:46, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

3. *30 July 1919: The first assassination authorised by Michael Collins occurs. Detective Sergeant Smith, a father of eight children, is shot dead outside his home after refusing to desist from vigorously pursuing his duties. What is the relevance of mentioning that Smith is a father of 8 children? The Banner talk 19:19, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

   Because I wanted to -- I remember how horrific the description in Tim Pat Coogan's book of his eight crying fatherless children and bereft widow on the way to the funeral was when I read about it. Same reason they mention that Thomas Oliver of Carlingford, killed by the IRA as an alleged informer, was a father of eight in news reports, or that Jean McConville was a mother of ten or James Connolly, who had, I think, seven children. There's no moral distinction. But since Smith doesn't have his own page (like the others), where else to put it? Quis separabit? 21:03, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

   So without a valid reason. The Banner talk 21:24, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

4. *7 September 1919: A government policy of reprisals began in Fermoy, County Cork. Some 200 British soldiers looted and burned several commercial buildings in the town, after twenty-three Cork IRA volunteers, under the leadership of Liam Lynch, augmented by Mick Mansfield and George Lennon of Waterford attacked members of the 2nd Battalion King's Shropshire Light Infantry en route to church services at the Wesleyan Church. One soldier, Private William Jones, 2nd Battalion King's Shropshire Light Infantry, was fatally wounded. Fifteen rifles were captured by the IRA. Lynch was wounded and taken to a Youghal safe house. Later he was transferred to West Waterford where he rested at Foley's in Ardmore and finally taken on to Cooney's farmhouse at Carriglea, Dungarvan, where he recovered from his wounds under the care of a physician, Dr Moloney, from a nearby town, before returning to Fermoy area. An external link into plain text is a nono. And why is the rest unsourced?The Banner talk 19:33, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

   I just have to add the reflink ([4]); so many names!! Unknown location has nothing to do with clear relevance to article. Quis separabit? 20:38, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

5. *14 December 1919: Constable Edward Bolger (aged 48) was shot dead in an ambush as he walked unarmed to his barracks. Why do you add this when you do not even know where it happened? The Banner talk 19:35, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

   I just have to add the reflink ([5]); so many names!! Unknown location has nothing to do with clear relevance to article. Quis separabit? 20:40, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

6. *26 December 1919: Constable William James Murtagh (aged 21) was shot dead by the accidental discharge of a colleague's rifle. Same question as the one above. Has his death something to do with the War or was it just an accident? The Banner talk 19:38, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

   I don't intentionally include accidental deaths but had it not been for the conflict he would never have been killed, no?? Quis separabit? 20:21, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

   Even in a war people die due to accidents, unrelated to the war. So this should be removed. The Banner talk 21:27, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

7. *31 December 1919: Constable Maurice Keough (aged 32) was fatally wounded at a disturbance when shot by mistake by a colleague. Same question as the one above. Has his death something to do with the War or was it just an accident? The Banner talk 19:38, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

   I don't intentionally include accidental deaths but had it not been for the conflict he would never have been killed, no?? Quis separabit? 20:40, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

   Even in a war people die due to accidents, unrelated to the war. So this should be removed. The Banner talk 21:27, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

8. 20 January 1920: Why did you replace the source by a source request? The Banner talk 19:43, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

   I don't know what this means. Quis separabit? 20:21, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

9. ** 12 February 1920: Constable Michael Neenan (aged 32) died after being fatally wounded by a bomb when his barracks was attacked by IRA volunteers. Unsourced and unknown where? The Banner talk 19:45, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

   I just have to add the reflink ([6]); so many names!! Unknown location has nothing to do with clear relevance to article. Quis separabit? 20:21, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

10. **2 March 1920: British intelligence operative of Irish descent, John Charles Byrnes (alias "Jack Jameson"), is killed by "the Squad". Why did you replace "British Intelligence double agent" (what he was according to the source) by "British intelligence operative of Irish descent" (what is only true due to his grandparents, according to the source). The Banner talk 19:52, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

    Since he was executed by the IRA as a British double agent tracking Michael Collins (the converse of being an Irish double agent, i.e. David Neligan in Dublin Castle, let's say), thus having given his life for the British cause, to refer to him as Irish is inaccurate, although I know he had roots in Ireland (possibly Limerick), hence the wording. Quis separabit? 20:21, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

11. *5 March 1920: Constable John Martin Heanue (aged 24) was shot and fatally wounded as he called at a village grocers shop. Unsourced and unknown where. The Banner talk 19:52, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

    I just have to add the reflink ([7]); so many names!! Unknown location has nothing to do with clear relevance to article. Quis separabit? 20:21, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

12. *10 March 1920: Sergeant George Neazer (aged 42) was shot dead by an IRA gang while he was escorting a land steward. Again unsourced.The Banner talk 19:55, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

    I just have to add the reflink ([8]); so many names!! Quis separabit? 20:21, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

13. *March 1920: The Kilkenny IRA captured the RIC barracks at Hugginstown County Kilkenny. Why was this removed? The Banner talk 19:55, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

    Because, as I indicated in the edit summaries, I rv some relatively minor, casualty-free incidents to trim the overly extensive and detailed timeline. If you disagree you are free to restore it. Just because something is sourced doesn't mean it stays forever. Quis separabit? 20:46, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

    The essence of a timeline is that it should be complete (as far as can be sourced). The Banner talk 21:29, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

14. *6 June 1920: RIC sergeant Tim Holland and a civilian, Peter Charles McCreesh, are killed by gunfire in an IRA ambush near Cullyhanna, South Armagh. Another constable is critically injured but survives. A third constable escapes unharmed. There is no source to back up this story, so the name change of the civilian (McReesh into McCreesh) and the additional two wounded constables is strange. The Banner talk 20:03, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

    Because I read the account with the correct surname (McCreesh) and added it. I will find the link. Quis separabit? 21:31, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

15. *29 June 1920: An IRA ambush in Ballina, north County Mayo, left one RIC man killed and one wounded. Why was this left out? The Banner talk 20:08, 12 October 2016 (UTC) --- I would not have removed that. Dunno what happened. Quis separabit? 21:31, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
16. *June 1920: An RIC man was killed in an IRA ambush in south County Armagh. Why was this left out? The Banner talk 20:08, 12 October 2016 (UTC) --- Again, I would not have removed that. Dunno what happened. Quis separabit? 21:31, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
17. *June 1920: Attack on Kingstown Coastguard station. Why was this sourced statement left out? The Banner talk 20:26, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

    Because, as I indicated in the edit summaries, I rv some relatively minor, casualty-free incidents to trim the overly extensive and detailed timeline. If you disagree you are free to restore it. Just because something is sourced doesn't mean it stays forever. Quis separabit? 20:46, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

18. * 13 July 1920: Two RIC constables (Michael Lenihan, aged 34, and George Roche, aged 32) are shot dead when their mobile patrol is ambushed by IRA gunmen in Dingle, County Kerry. Again unsourced but you seem to know the names. The Banner talk 20:28, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

    I just have to add the reflink ([9]); so many names!! Quis separabit? 20:46, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

19. * 17 July 1920: British Colonel Gerard Smyth was assassinated by the IRA in Country Club in Cork city in a reprisal for a speech he made to RIC men encouraging reprisals. Railway workers refused to carry Smyth's body. Smyth is from Banbridge, County Down and his killing provoked retaliation in the north against Catholics in Banbridge and Dromore. All you need to know, including sources, can be found in the article Listowel mutiny. The Banner talk 20:29, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

    Fair enough, so trim it as you see fit. Too much redundant info is easy to repair. Quis separabit? 20:46, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

20. ** A gun battle took place between British soldiers and the Ballyhaunis IRA at Holywell on the Ballyhaunis-Claremorris Road, County Mayo. Five British soldiers and one IRA volunteer wounded. You are very exact regarding the "British" but why do you change "one IRA officer" into "one IRA volunteer"? The Banner talk 20:32, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

    I have been using the term "volunteer" to describe IRA personnel, in the absence of any title or rank to the contrary, simply as "volunteer". Quis separabit? 20:46, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

    But with an unsourced statement referring to "British officers" you do not change that in "British soldiers". The Banner talk 21:58, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

    This has been updated with sources by myself Future Research (talk) 16:05, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

21. * 27 July 1920: An RIC constable is shot dead by IRA volunteers in Clonakilty, County Cork. Why do you replace the correct statement [[Clonakilty]], [[County Cork]] for the less accurate [[Clonakilty|Clonakilty, County Cork]]. The Banner talk 20:16, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

    How is [[Clonakilty]], [[County Cork]] for the less accurate [[Clonakilty|Clonakilty, County Cork]] "less accurate"? Quis separabit? 21:31, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

    You squeeze two valid links into one. The Banner talk 21:58, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

22. * 4 August 1920: An unarmed IRA unit burned down unoccupied RIC barracks in Blackrock, County Louth. Why was this left out? The Banner talk 20:33, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

    Because, as I indicated in the edit summaries, I rv some relatively minor, casualty-free incidents to trim the overly extensive and detailed timeline. If you disagree you are free to restore it. Just because something is sourced doesn't mean it stays forever. Quis separabit? 20:46, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

23. * 7 August 1920: The IRA's East Limerick Flying Column under Donnacha O'Hannigan and George Lennon, joined forces with a Cork Column under Tom Barry to ambush a six-man RIC foot patrol near Kildorrery, County Cork. All the RIC men were wounded, one fatally (Black and Tan Ernest S. Watkins). Six revolvers and 250 rounds of ammunition were seized. There are no sources, so why do you change the first name of O'Hannigan, "Donnchadh", into "Donnacha"? The Banner talk 20:36, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

    Because it seemed misspelled and a majority of online sources give the name as "Donnacha". Quis separabit? 20:50, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

24. * 16 August 1920: British forces burned buildings in Templemore as a reprisal for IRA actions. Why was this left out? The Banner talk 20:37, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

    Because, as I indicated in the edit summaries, I rv some relatively minor, casualty-free incidents to trim the overly extensive and detailed timeline. If you disagree you are free to restore it. Just because something is sourced doesn't mean it stays forever. Quis separabit? 20:50, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

25. 27 August: Protestant businesses in Dundalk are attacked in reprisal for the Lisburn attacks. Why was this left out? The Banner talk 20:39, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

    Because, as I indicated in the edit summaries, I rv some relatively minor, casualty-free incidents to trim the overly extensive and detailed timeline. If you disagree you are free to restore it. Just because something is sourced doesn't mean it stays forever. Quis separabit? 20:50, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

26. August 1920: The Enniscrone Coast Guard station, County Sligo, was burned by IRA members. Also in Sligo, an IRA ambush near Tubbercurry killed one RIC man and wounded two more. Tubbercurry was then subjected to reprisals by the RIC. Why was this left out? The Banner talk 20:39, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

    Because, as I indicated in the edit summaries, I rv some relatively minor, casualty-free incidents to trim the overly extensive and detailed timeline. If you disagree you are free to restore it. Just because something is sourced doesn't mean it stays forever. Quis separabit? 20:50, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

27. An RIC Hut at Redpark, Cloontumper near Ballyhaunis was attacked and destroyed by the local IRA. Why was this left out? The Banner talk 20:39, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

    Because, as I indicated in the edit summaries, I rv some relatively minor, casualty-free incidents to trim the overly extensive and detailed timeline. If you disagree you are free to restore it. Just because something is sourced doesn't mean it stays forever. Quis separabit? 20:50, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

28. A train carrying steel shutters destined for Westport RIC was held up at Holywell Bog near Ballyhaunis Co. Mayo and the shutters removed and buried in the bog by members of the Ballyhaunis IRA. Why was this left out? The Banner talk 20:39, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

    Because, as I indicated in the edit summaries, I rv some relatively minor, casualty-free incidents to trim the overly extensive and detailed timeline. If you disagree you are free to restore it. Just because something is sourced doesn't mean it stays forever. Quis separabit? 20:50, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

29. *14 September 1920: James Connolly, Unshinnagh, Kinlough, County Leitrim, is shot dead by the Black and Tans in front of his own house by military who came to arrest his son. Being deaf he did not hear an order to put up his hands. Even without source you seem to know that the father was deaf and that they came for the son. The Banner talk 20:41, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

    Because I did my due diligence and checked it out. Is that bad? Quis separabit? 20:50, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

    You did research and still do not have a source? The Banner talk 21:33, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

I found the reflink (see Section VI). Quis separabit? 02:57, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

1. *14 November 1920: A Catholic priest, Father Michael Griffin disappeared. He had left his residence at St. Joseph's Church, in Galway; his housekeeper heard him talking to someone at the door and assumed that Fr. Griffin was going to visit a sick parishioner. He never returned. His disappearance was reported to the police the following day. It afterwards emerged that he had been abducted and killed by state forces. The given source is not a profile of Father Michael Griffin as suggested but a page about the "Webley Mark VI Revolver". The source only states that he was a priest, not that he was a curate. The Banner talk 20:56, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

   Because I remember reading it, presumably in Coogan's book. But here is a valid source to confirm it: (http://www.advertiser.ie/galway/article/33725/father-michael-griffin) Quis separabit? 21:18, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

   Then please change the sourcing.The Banner talk 21:33, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

2. *February 1921: British soldiers imposed a curfew on the Mountjoy Square area of north Dublin city and conducted a house-to-house search. Shortly afterwards another similar curfew was imposed on the Nassau Street/Kildare Street area. Few arrests were made but some arms were seized. Why was this left out? The Banner talk 21:05, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

   Because, as I indicated in the edit summaries, I rv some relatively minor, casualty-free incidents to trim the overly extensive and detailed timeline. If you disagree you are free to restore it. Just because something is sourced doesn't mean it stays forever. And this is particularly trivial. Quis separabit? 21:18, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

3. There were attacks on British soldiers at Nassau Street and Merrion Square Dublin by the 3rd Battalion Dublin Brigade Why was this sourced statement left out? The Banner talk 21:05, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

   Trimmed boilerplate text as no casualties were indicated -- when weren't British troops battling the IRA between 1919-23? Quis separabit? 21:18, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

4. British soldiers were ambushed at the junction of Aungier Street/Bishop Street by C Company, 3rd Battalion Dublin Brigade. Why was this sourced statement left out? The Banner talk 21:05, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

   Trimmed boilerplate text as no casualties were indicated -- when weren't British troops battling the IRA between 1919-23? Quis separabit? 21:18, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

5. ** Two IRA volunteers, the Coffey brothers, were assassinated in their beds by unknown gunmen in Enniskeane, Cork. Why do you leave this part out: "Republicans blame an Auxiliary or Black and Tan unit but suspicion also falls on a local loyalist organisation known as the Loyalist Action Group."? The Banner talk 21:08, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

   Because it amounts to speculation from a very POV quarter. Quis separabit? 21:18, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

6. **Two British soldiers were arrested near Liscarroll, County Cork, court-martialed by the IRA and then released four days later Why was this left out? The Banner talk 21:09, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

   My edit summary says it all. Check it out. Quis separabit? 21:18, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

   A timeline should be complete, as far as it can be sourced. The Banner talk 22:03, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

• "A timeline should be complete, as far as it can be sourced." - well, for one thing, in a timeline like this it is almost impossible given how many things can happen in four years or so, hence the tag {{dynamic}} and secondly, most of the entries when I found them were unsourced. I can't do everything. Quis separabit? 22:32, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

In general

1. Why do you add the age by "British" victims but not by Irish victims? The Banner talk 19:41, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

   Because the site I use for the RIC fatalities gives the ages. I do given ages for Irish (by which I presume you mean republicans/civilians, as the RIC were almost exclusively Irish) when they are available. Quis separabit? 21:31, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

   IN FACT: I added this

   * 23 August 1919: Francis Murphy, aged 15, of County Clare is shot by British soldiers {{Why|date=October 2016}} and dies as a result of bullet wounds received while sitting by the fire reading a book. An inquest found the military responsible, but the military refuted this and claimed to have carried out an extensive investigation.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.irishmedals.org/civilians-killed.html|title=Civilians Killed|publisher=|accessdate=11 October 2016}}</ref></blockquote> Quis separabit? 21:37, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

   In fact I had already seen where the ages where coming from and I had removed the question. The Banner talk 22:01, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

2. Why do you change the text from the past in the present? For example: 17 January 1920, where you changed "attacked" into "attacks". The Banner talk 19:41, 12 October 2016 (UTC) Quis separabit? 21:36, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

   If we are given a timeline, it is just as appropriate to use the present tense as the past as far as I know. If there is consensus against I can always change it. Quis separabit? 21:31, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

   Still al facts happened in the past. The Banner talk 22:03, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

IN GENERAL

• This source indicates the deaths which occurred during 1919-23, and the few which have no connection to the conflict are indicated accordingly. The place of the incident is not included so I try checking other sites but it is very hard as a lot of people with similar names on both sides of the conflict were killed during the Troubles. The fact that the location is unknown has nothing to do with the relevance. Also this is the site which gives some details (like "shot in the back", unarmed, off-duty, etc). Quis separabit? 20:21, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

April 2021

There is an entry beginning "British soldiers held up at the Dodder banks, South Dublin while they were rendezvousing with girlfriends" A "they"was required and I have added this. "rendezvousing with" looks clumsy and meeting would be better. However were the soldiers "meeting girlfriends","going to meet girlfriends" or "waiting to meet girlfriends ?" I don't have the source so I cannot tell. Alternatively is this entry important enough to be included?