Talk:McNulty

Extensive[edit]

Extensive listing of notable persons bearing this surname is provided as McNulty is not actually a surname for a family, but, is, rather, as explained in the article, an agnomen or put more, simply, an alias given to persons, possibly, of varing septs, relocated from Ulster. The list is intended to consolidate these individuals for benefit of researchers in the area, which researchers may not be able to trace individuals of this surname through ancestral lines. Along these lines, the last section on other alias of the Donlevy is also added. This section is intended to provide genealogical researchers with infomation on possible ancesteral links of persons who may have grossly divergent surnames. It is known to near historical certainty that some of the persons surnamed McNulty are really Donlevy. As can be observed, therefore, these sections and detail do not diverge from the subject of this surname. Finally, granted, there does exist excessive detail for some of the individuals listed, as Wikipedia, unlike other highly reputable encyclopedias, like the Brittanica does not yet have biographical detail for many of these individual and should. This temporarily installed detail is intended to aid persons, who may be attempting to research in the Wikipedia these otherwise prominent individuals, who have significantly impacted various fields and are very relevant to research therein, but, who do not otherwise appear at all yet in the Wikipedia. As soon as I am able to create articles for these individuals, the excessive detail shall be removed. It is a provisional aid for those using Wikipedia. This is a work in progress. For example, Wikipedia now lacks an article on the prominent 19th century Canadian poet Alexander McLachly, who is mentioned at the end of the McNulty surname article and who has a biographical entry in almost every other major encyclopedia and biographical dictionary in the English language (including the Brittanica Encyclopedia, the Merriam-Webster's Biographical Dictionary and the Canadian Biographical Dictionary. He is said by both contemporary and historical critics to be the Canadian "Burns". As soon as I am able to create a Wikipedia article for the poet McLachly, I shall remove the detail in the McNulty article and that I have provisionally provided to aid Wikipedia users and to which they are directed when searching the name in Wikipedia. Another example is the Wikipedia article, which I created for Cormac MacDonlevy, who is significant to researchers of medical history, particularly, medieval medical history and who was already thereto in the Oxford Biographical Dictionary and is also an Ultach or Nulty. Wiki actually realized that it lacked information on this individual and the need for creation of such article, which is what started me on this project. Again, this is a work in progress, which, I believe, shall ultimately benefit and enhance the Wikipedia as a research source, at least, in small measure.

Also, inclosing, as to the extensive notations of the McNulty surname article, Wikpedia does not have an article on the MacDonlevy dynasty at all and, otherwise, lacks entirely anywhere else adequate detail on these royals, who were so important to the course of both European political (particularly British) and medical history and the remnants of whom, for the most part, are the McNulty. I, ultimately, intend to create pages for both the MacDonlevy dynasty and Donlevy (surname) that redirect to the McNulty article. The number of persons, who still actually bear the original Donlevy name in alternative to McNulty and its spelling variants is today quite, quite small. I shall also be creating a separate article on the MacDonlevy/McNulty physicians of Tyrconnell.

I'm sorry, but this article is completely over the top. Paragraphs are entirely too long (as here, on the talk page) making the whole thing illegible; the list of names contains way too many redlinks (convention says we don't do that, to avoid BLP violations for instance) and excessive detail; and there are no reliable sources to verify this mass of text. Looking closer, this appears to be a combination of original research and synthesis, with a preponderance of the former. What this needs is reliable sources that actually verify the information given, and a much more conservative, economical, and encyclopedic approach to writing. I'm going to revert this to an earlier version. Feel free to add names that have articles on Wikipedia--and to add properly verified and encyclopedic material. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 22:33, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I had another look at your old version. Above, you make a point about a poet McLachly. You are welcome to create that article, but the information you had in here is of little use to a Wikipedia reader, and it would be impossible for anyone looking for information on Alexander McLachlan (poet) to end up in this article--and even if they did, I doubt that they would have found their way to the second paragraph of the final section. Besides, that paragraph, like all others, is unreadably long, and your McLachlan was all the way at the end of it. In general, the problem with the excessive information is that it's not cited; especially for people, especially living people, that's just not a good idea, to put it mildly. Drmies (talk) 22:46, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you that when I provide biographical detail while I am preparing additional articles for historically prominent persons, who are lacking from Wikipedia, I should provide citations for the material. However, I disagree with you on three points. First, I do not agree with you that the article "Is over the top." All of the information is logically and more than tangentally connected to the subject. Secondly, I do not believe that a research source, Wikipedia or any other, can provide too much information. While Wikipedia is not as well vetted as some other more traditional research sources, it has been such a boon to research, just, because it provides information and research avenues that those other sources lack, and, consequently, is an excellent research source to direct from to better research sources. Finally, the article is not my "synthesis" of anything, as you would have discovered had you bothered to approach this matter constructively and in an earnest manner and first viewed the research sources that I have already provided, rather, than to salve your ego by, simply, maliciously, undoing the work of others and returning it to an article, which is both grossly inaccurate and completely unsourced. The original article when I began editing it as it does again, now, because of your ill considered undoing of my labors states that the McNulty were the royalty of Ulidia. They were not. The MacDolevy were the royalty of Ulidia. Some Donlevy did adopt what evolved to that surname in exile, but it also likely evolved otherwise with differing septs displaced from Ulster. Finally, as to your opinion of my writing style or that you consider me verbose, as I have a professional doctorate, several undergraduate degrees and an additional masters degree from the likes of the Claremont Graduate School, I could care less. I am, however, now interested to see what types of article contributions that you yourself have made to the Wikipedia, if any, and there quality and shall begin to research the matter so I can determine how much validity I should give your critisism of my work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Albiet (talk • contribs) 23:15, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, anyone can see that the article is not unsourced--I added to references from books to it. Your sources (such as this one) don't say anything about the name; rather, they verify information which is not directly relevant to the topic but which are made to appear relevant--but what the place Clonoulty has to do with the name McNulty, that's anyone's guess. If you disagree with the content, and you have sources to verify that, go ahead and put it in, preferably in a concise manner (your footnotes even were way too long). As for my ego--it's fine, thanks, though I apologize if I hurt yours. You are welcome to peruse my contributions, of course. Skip the bacon related articles: they are youthful indiscretions. Drmies (talk) 00:52, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, the article does not say "the McNulty were the royalty of Ulidia"--it doesn't come close to stating that. Drmies (talk) 00:56, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The original article that I devoted substantial time to correcting and improving and the article as you have now restored it does not come close to saying that the McNulty are the royalty of Ulidia, it cleearly misleads the reader into believing this, without the further explanation and citation, which I provided. You may want to go to Black's Law Dictionary and look up the definition of the word "fraud". Is it better to lie to Wikipedia readers or provide them too much information? Since it does not appear that you, yourself, are willing to invest the time and work needed to make this original Wikipedia article on the McNulty surname more historically acurrate, truthful and comprehensive for the Wikipedia reader, you might have simply provided me the constructive critisism that my extensive revisions might be overwhelming for the less scholarly adept readers and that the article needed to be broken down into several smaller and more cohesive articles, rather, than your being offensive and sirly. This type of tact and the skills needed to properly correspond in polite society are, however, skills that are bred into persons over decades, so I am probably just wasting my time here. Anyway, I will take care of this work myself over time.
  In closing, your inability to recognize that Clonoulty is anglicized from Irish language terms meaning the fifth of Ireland or Ulster, that is that portion of Ireland that was legendarily granted to the royal forbears of the Donlevy demonstrates that you have little grasp of the subject matter that you are attempting to edit or criticize. I shall make it simple for you. “Clonoulty” is an Anglicized contraction of Irish “Cuige” (fifth) and “an Ultaigh” (Ulsterite), as in “Mac an Ultaigh” (of the Ulsterites), which is Anglicized by contraction to “McNulty “ (Does this surname “McNulty” appear even remotely similar to the subject of an article that you recently felt qualified to imperiously rule upon?) As this is also explained repeatedly elsewhere in the article, your continued ignorance of this fact also demonstrates that you made no real attempt to comprehensively examine this article before precipitously acting to remove it. If you limit your criticism of others work to the structure of their exposition, you shall embarras yourself less in future. Finally, where Alexander McLachly is placed in the article is not pertinent. Persons attempting to research him by entering his name into the Wikipedia site, would be lead to the article and while the information on him is not sourced, the short biographical detail for him might aid their further research by providing direction. Also, your innuendo that my article citations are specious is also unjustified and offensive; however, as you do not understand misleading statements are lies and fraud, I doubt that you shall, either, grasp the subtlety of an innuendo or how offensive you are being to people when you communicate with them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Albiet (talk • contribs) 05:37, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Continuation Of Reply With Further Elaboration and References To Aid Understanding:
  “A false representation of a matter of fact, whether by words or by conduct, by false or misleading allegations or by concealment of that which should have (also) been disclosed, which deceives and is intended to deceive another …” – ‘’5th Blacks Law Dictionary’’, p. 594 (emphasis and parenthetical added) (Of course legally actionable misrepresentation requires reliance and legal injury.)
  Ultach and Mac an Ultaigh were names that did not exist contemporaneously with the Dal Faitach and the McNulty, therefore, could not possibly have been a branch of the Dal Faitach except by a known historical lineage of some and only some McNulty to the Donlevy.
  “Innuendo … an oblique allusion: HINT, INSINUATION; esp : a veiled or unequivocal reflection on character …” – Merriam-Webster’s 11th Collegiate
  As to your other comments, which are another subtle “put down”, the real problem is not that you’re words are offensive or that you might lack social skills or that I might be soft skinned, which is your intended “innuendo”. The real problem is that without any qualification in the area or, apparent, original motive to improve the conveyance of knowledge in the area to other Wikipedia readers, you are attempting to, instead, deny them knowledge, and you shall not succeed at this here. Also, I did not know that I needed your permission to “feel free” to either make article contributions to the Wikipedia or to edit Wikipedia articles to add citations. I shall contribute what I feel appropriate, including by, if I wish, restoring as many times as you can delete them, the revisions that I made to the Wikipedia article on the surname McNulty; however, as I agree with the your implication that the article revisions were overwhelming, I shall handle this matter otherwise for the benefit of Wikipedia researchers and to preclude your being able to with, even, the pretext of legitimacy being able to interfere with the same in future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Albiet (talk • contribs) 05:48, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Note: talk page edited to aid legibility: please don't start new individual sections to respond; WP:TPG has more information. Albiet, please use four tildes (~~~~) to sign your messages. For future reference, should you choose to escalate, you might come across editors writing "TL:DNR" or some variation thereof; that acronym is enlightened in an essay, Wikipedia:Too long; didn't read.
    One more thing: you claimed I left the article unreferenced. That is a falsehood, and a gentleman shouldn't lie. I added two references from printed books. That is the way to proceed. There is no other. Drmies (talk) 13:54, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reply[edit]

As you originally restored the Article on 22:33 20 April 2013 and as pertinent to my comments, it did not have any sources, as did not the original restored article. During our subsequent discussions, you did add 2 sources. Don't you thnk that calling someone a liar is crossing a line? This discussion is getting entirely out of hand, of point and I am therefore here ending it. I shall not respond to any of your further posts on this page or at all. You obviously are not trying to in anyway contribute constructively to either this issue or this Encyclopedia. You are becoming outrageous here. On a closing note, it is also interesting that during the course of these discussions, my Albiet site has been deleted without a log or explanation that I can find. I don't know what happened yet, but I am investigating it. Albiet (talk) 19:04, 21 April 2013 (UTC)Albiet[reply]

Correction[edit]

My Albiet page was not deleted, I was miss directing from Link Albiet. The problem has been resolved and was my error.Albiet (talk) 19:19, 21 April 2013 (UTC)Albiet[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on McNulty. 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/20150103224426/http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq63-1.htm to http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq63-1.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: 18 January 2022).

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) 22:26, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on McNulty. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 17:48, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup in progress[edit]

The vast amount of content in this article, almost all added by one editor, appears to be a transparent attempt to circumvent the result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Socially or Historically Significant Persons Bearing the Surname McNulty. I am in the process of merging relevant content where appropriate, and deleting the many mini-biographies of non-notable people called McNulty, or people who aren't even called McNulty to begin with. FDW777 (talk) 11:51, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Donlevyarms.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:52, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]