Jump to content

Talk:Provisional Irish Republican Army

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good article nomineeProvisional Irish Republican Army was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 1, 2012Good article nomineeNot listed
March 9, 2021Good article nomineeNot listed
On this day...Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on July 28, 2008, July 28, 2009, July 28, 2010, July 28, 2013, July 28, 2015, July 28, 2018, July 28, 2020, and July 28, 2024.
Current status: Former good article nominee


Shanahan citation

[edit]

I can't edit the article since I don't have a user, but I just wanted to draw attention to a problem in a source cited in support of the claim that "Following partition, Northern Ireland became a de facto one-party state governed by the Ulster Unionist Party in the Parliament of Northern Ireland, in which Catholics were viewed as second-class citizens." The footnote cites p. 12 of Timothy Shanahan's book "The Provisional Irish Republican Army and the Morality of Terrorism". On that page, however, the author describes the "Standard Republican Narrative" of which he says that "I will not argue that these myths are false in all respects, but rather that they contain partial-truths at best and that the reality is considerably more complicated" (p. 11).

Should the category " casualties " not be titled " victims ".

[edit]

category description 94.173.17.182 (talk) 16:57, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Since the section also includes the IRA's casualties, no. Kathleen's bike (talk) 10:56, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 24 October 2023

[edit]

When talking about IRA targets it must be pointed out that they targeted civilians not connected with the military. For instance the Warrington Town centre bombing and the Arndale Shopping centre amongst others. They also targeted children and young people. 2A00:23C8:2455:4301:EA:900A:F8C6:2E00 (talk) 15:11, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence? The Banner talk 15:20, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you genuinely believe that then you are either insane (in the legal definition under the M'Naghten Rules in which an individual is deemed to be insane if they cannot distinguish right from wrong), a propagandist, or know absolutely nothing. In any of these cases I suggest you stop editing articles connected with this topic. The IP editor literally listed examples but you do not appear to care. 82.16.150.34 (talk) 22:22, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, they didn't examples. They detailed two incidents, then drew their own conclusions about the targets of those incidents. I recommend reading what Martin Dillon and Andy Oppenheimer (both cited in the article) have said about Warrington, you might learn that your own beliefs are very mistaken. FDW777 (talk) 10:38, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. This is not an uncontroversial edit which can be applied via an edit request. (It's also not in a "change x to y" format) PianoDan (talk) 21:14, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The IRA's attacks on civilians are already mentioned = approximately 25 times in the article, including twice in the lead. Would you perhaps also like a banner saying "These guys were bad!"? BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 22:33, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 11 March 2024

[edit]

Add the "anti-imperialist organization" tag Lajward.Candango (talk) 01:27, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: The article makes no mention of the IRA having an anti-imperialist stance. Although sources appear to exist that could support such a claim in the article, I also doubt that it would be considered a WP:DEFCAT; it might be an aspect of their motivations, but it's probably far from being their central ideology. Liu1126 (talk) 10:49, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 6 July 2024

[edit]

The provisional IRA was NOT a “terrorist organisation,” it was the only defence Irish Catholic people had against the RUC and British Army, who were placing these innocent people in internment centres without crime or without trial simply for being Irish. Cárthach Leahy (talk) 19:37, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. PianoDan (talk) 17:36, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Officially known as"?

[edit]

What does this phrase mean? Does it mean "self-described as"? In fact they self-described as "Óglaigh na hÉireann" (which does not translate as "Irish Republican Army" either but as "younglings of Ireland" or more idiomatically "Irish volunteers", IRA merely being a euphemism of no status from 1919 onwards). And that is also the title of the Irish Defence Forces, which surely have a higher claim on "officially" etc. 185.60.76.112 (talk) 11:35, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See the history section about their origins. The Banner talk 12:36, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That has nothing to do with the "officially known as" though - "officially" by what? What office or officer calls them this? 2A02:C7C:37D6:C100:885E:F169:EE60:F3F7 (talk) 20:07, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]