Talk:Natural resources of the Republic of Ireland

Revision[edit]

I had wondered why the article seemed wishy washy. Needs urgent revision. Ewanduffy 18:05, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup and merge[edit]

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

This article is in serious need of review. The intro itself is informal in tone ("a fair amount of Zinc"), includes baffling and uncited assertions ("Their rocks are composed of minerals", "they are huge traders with Canada"), unneccesary emphasis/bolding ("new energy sources"), and a very unusual use of the English language ("many models have proceeded in the industry").

The body also includes weird emphases, incomprehensible tables (that have nothing to do with natural resources), pointless wiki linking, ("14,000"), and what can only be copy and pasted data from marginally related sources. In particular, the "economic data" (Including such strangely formed "facts" as: "Its Economic aid donor was ODA"?????) make the article all but impossible to read, and is all but unrelated to the topic.

In short, unless anyone has any better ideas, I am going to cull most of this pointless content, and return the article to a readable state that will - by definition - exclude this extraneous and blinding "data". Guliolopez (talk) 21:07, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK. After a concerted effort to improve this article, I'm beginning to think that it's unrecoverable (and of very little/limited value).

The vast bulk of this article relates to lists of economic metrics with little to no attempt made to associate the economy of the Island to its natural resources. (The purported key topic)

Where the content *is* partially related to natural resources (for example in the "list of mining companies" and "list of government acts" sections), the text focuses on (respectively) the "sales blurb" of the mining company in question, and the dates of enactment & statutory powers of the government bodies. Again, there is little to no focus on HOW these companies or acts manage or leverage the island's natural resources. Or the impact of the utilisation/exploitation of those resources. Or (conversely) on the fortunes of those companies that manage them. Or (as noted) on the economy.

In short, I am not at all confident that there is any value to this article under the current title, and that any valuable text that there might be could easily (and more appropriately) be merged into the relevant Economy of Ireland and Ireland articles. (Under the "Energy" and "Geology" sections.)

I am further convinced by the fact that there is not one other article entitled "Natural resources of [country or territory]". (Save for this example - which is a bit better, but equally inaccessible).

Thoughts before nom for merge and delete? Guliolopez (talk) 20:10, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alright:: I've done my best with this article: culling the unrelated clutter, attempting to organise into something logical, and removing all the pointless external links and weird internal links. In spite of this, many of the other noted problems still remain: unverified claims on (for example) energy production numbers, SPAM on mining companies, detail on "Natural Resources Acts" which have no context, etc. Frankly, without further cleanup, reorganisation or context, I remain unconvinced that this article is adding any value to the project. (It also remains decidedly unclear whether the titular subject includes NI or just ROI, or a combination of both jurisdictions). Anyway, I'm done with this for now, and will move onto something else. Guliolopez (talk) 02:10, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple issues

Granted it's been 7 years since opening the thread above (and cleaning-up the worst of the offending issues), but this article still suffers from multiple problems:

References - There's still a lot of uncited content in the article. (From the stuff in the lead about peat representing 12% of energy generation, to the "General" section which throws numbers around without supporting cites of any kind. Whether it's numbers of pigs or barrels of oil produced, there isn't a cite to be found anywhere.) Without cites this stuff should really be excised.
Undue weight - One of the lengthiest sections in the article deals with the Corrib situation. While this is relevant to the use (or misuse or whatever one's POV may be) of the island's natural resources, it should really be a short summary with a {{main}} link to the relevant article(s).
Context - The "list of relevant acts" and "list of mining companies" are a little disconnected and not editorially tied to the titular subject.

Personally I feel that, if these issues were addressed to guideline (for example the uncited stuff being removed, and the "undue weight" issues addressed by cutting back to a summary), there would be very little left. Possibly nothing. I question whether this is why Kosovo and Ireland are the only European countries that have an article of this type in the first place - but I suspect it's because it's difficult to cover the topic without "bending" OR and associated guidelines. I appreciate that I've been threatening for 7 years and haven't done anything to improve it (further), and it's quite likely I'm talking to myself anyway, but I'll at least feel better knowing we've shown an "issues" label to readers - to let them know it's not the community's best work.... Guliolopez (talk) 23:51, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved In the decade (yes decade) since I first raised concerns about this article, I've made some attempts to clean it up. Anything that I haven't done in 10 years is unlikely now to get done. So am closing this thread. Am leaving the hatnotes in place though. As still don't think this represents the community's best work.... Guliolopez (talk) 17:16, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page[edit]

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

http://www.offshore-technology.com/projects/corrib/
Triggered by \boffshore-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 12:06, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 20:58, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Natural resources of Ireland. 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:

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: 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:20, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 5 external links on Natural resources of Ireland. 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:

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

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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} 05:11, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Checked. Guliolopez (talk) 22:23, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Natural resources of the Republic of Ireland. 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/20121103223541/http://www.mineralsireland.ie/Mining+in+Ireland to http://www.mineralsireland.ie/Mining+in+Ireland/

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) 05:00, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]