Talk:Wexford

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

Ireland Mid‑importance

	Ireland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject IrelandTemplate:WikiProject IrelandIreland articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Irish Maritime

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Irish Maritime, a collaborative effort to improve and standardise the content and structure of maritime, seafaring and inland waterways articles associated with the island of Ireland. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Irish MaritimeWikipedia:WikiProject Irish MaritimeTemplate:WikiProject Irish MaritimeIrish Maritime articles

Initial text

Does anyone else think that the section on the opera festival is substantially lacking in NPOV? colm — Preceding unsigned comment added by Colmlinehan (talk • contribs) 23:01, 4 April 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Towns & villages

Not sure if this talk section is used (properly) but should the information about wexford's population not be the population of the county and not the town of wexford which maybe should have a unique page194.237.142.10 15:30, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is the unique page for Wexford town. For the county see County Wexford.

tpower 11:16, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Section deletedPeter Clarke 18:09, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Coat of Arms

Coat of arms is wrong, county arms displayed, should be borough. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.141.204.45 (talk) 15:25, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wexford Opera

Perhaps Weford Opera deserves a separate entry?? Thoughts? Jdwexford 22:42, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it does, like other Opera Festivals such as Glyndebourne and Garsington Opera. I'll be happy to volunteer.

--GuillaumeTell 19:09, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Semi Protection

I think its time to semi protect this artical to stop this recuring UFO vandalism guys.--Ferdia O'Brien 18:21, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that excessive at the moment so I think this can be left as it is. A problem with one of the semi-protection notices is that it is unnecessarily prominent and slaps people in the face when they look at the article.--A bit iffy 11:57, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trivia

The trivia section seems a little pointless, the first fact is about a fictional character, and doesnt seem to do much for an artical on a town, it should really be moved to the Father Ted article, and in accoundance with the Towns & Villages decision recheached above, the Saving Private Ryan fact should be moved, since it has nothing to do with the town what-so-ever, since Curracloe isnt even flanking the town. --Ferdia O'Brien 18:21, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removed section

I removed this:

==Flora and Fauna== ''Asparagopsis armata'' Harv., ''Crouania attenuata'' (C.Ag) J.Ag, ''Gastroclonium reflexum'' (Menegh. ex Zanard.) Kutz., ''Rhodymenia pseudoplamata'' var. ''ellisae'' (Duby) Guiry in Guiry et Hollenberg and ''Shottera nicaeensis'' (Lamour. ex Duby) Guiry et Hollenberg are species which, previous to 1979, had not been reported from Wexford. <ref name="Guiry, Cullinane and Whelan 79">'''Guiry, M.D., Cullinane, J.P. and Whelan, P.M.''' 1979. Notes on Irish marine algae - 3. New records of Rhodophyta from the Wexford coast. ''Ir. Nat. J.'' '''19'''(9): 304 - 307</ref>

It's badly written, completely meaningless to the average user, and doesn't indicate its notability. Its mere factual presence in the town does not make it encyclopaedic. Joe D (t) 00:12, 4 April 2007 (UTC) I came upon this ref. - someone may wish to write up the Flora & fauna and this will be one ref perhaps of use. If you don't want it I take no hurt at it being deleted.Osborne 08:55, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Churches and Colleges

I've mentioned St Iberius (I'm a Protestant) but could somebody please put something in about Roe Street Church and its distinctive spire, and the impressive St Peter's College, not least the chapel designed by Augustus Welby Pugin. Millbanks 21:38, 22 August 2007 (UTC) Actually it's 'ROWE' street. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Menapian2000 (talk • contribs) 16:59, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External Links

I wonder why Sarah777 removed the external link as follows:

Hidden Wexford Genealogy, A website devoted to those researching Wexford institutions

It seems curious on the face of it that there are no external links in the article, and the one I added seems relevant to anyone researching various aspects of the city's social history. Yumegusa (talk) 14:50, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Restored link to the genealogy website discussed above.
Queries on the other two links here:
1) The 'official tourism website' appears to relate primarily to County Wexford
2) The link 'Wexford: A Town and its Landscape' is to a book sale page. How does that sit with guidelines?
--Yumegusa (talk) 23:15, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As for 2 I'd remove it. If it was cited in the article that would be different but it just seems to be a link.--Albert.white (talk) 22:28, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that those links should be removed from this article, where they are inappropriate. They shouldn't be used as justification for yet further inappropriate external links. William Avery (talk) 06:57, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

History: Loyalists or Ulster loyalism

Re 1798, the text reads: "Wexford town was held by the rebels throughout the fighting and was the scene of a notorious massacre of local loyalists..." I believe the most appropriate wikilink for "loyalists" here is to Loyalist where we read a historical section on "18th century Ireland", rather than to Ulster loyalism, which deals with the 20^th century phenomenon. That's why I've reverted that part of the last edit. Is there an argument for the contrary position, that I'm unaware of?
--Yumegusa (talk) 11:03, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Beware: cutting edge

Paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 of the "Modern Wexford" section seem inappropriately detailed, with blow-by-blow listings of companies and building projects. Phrasing such as "Modern building developments in Wexford have not shirked from the architectural cutting edge" are more suited to a tourist brochure than a NPOV encyclopaedia article. The stream of time-sensitive info is also unfortunate. Any arguments for not cutting through this with a rapier?
--Yumegusa (talk) 23:02, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gerald Fleming

An editor (Hhelibeb) has twice edited Gerald Fleming (in the "People" section of the article) in contradiction to the cited source. If she can cite a verifiable reliable source supporting her assertion that Fleming was born in Waterford, let her do so. Otherwise the text must stand, in accordance with WP guidelines. --Yumegusa (talk) 13:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, about that. The source clearly states that Gerald Fleming was 'from' there, not 'born there'. To say he was born there is to jump to comclusions. In any case, Wexford's hospital did not have a maternity unit in the 50s when Mr Fleming was born. He was born in Waterford in 1957.--Hhelibeb (talk) 16:50, 23 October 2009

Okay then, let's amend the text of the article to say he's from there (whatever that means). But please tell us of your source to support your repeated assertion that Fleming was born in Waterford. --Yumegusa (talk) 21:53, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's better. For your information, where someone is 'from' is generally a self-identifying property and does not indicate place of birth. For example, Mark Knopfler was born in Glasgow but is 'from' Newcastle. I didn't put the Waterford part in the article, only the discussion, as an online source does not exist as yet. I may ask him to put something online but I'm really not that petty! --Hhelibeb (talk) 09:56, 24 October 2009

Quality and peacock

I have just done some work on the quality and peacock issues within the article, but much remains to be done. Significant tracts of the article are composed in a colloquial style, not suitable for WP. Both these issues need continued work, i will certainly do some, but i also invite other people to join in. Darigan (talk) 14:50, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Patrick Redmond

As per article edit, I have placed the removed content here, and invite any of the anon IPs (or anybody else for that matter) to offer some indication of the notability of former amateur boxer, Patrick Redmond:

" * Patrick (Paddy) Redmond, an amateur boxer, nicknamed 'Whacker' was born and lived in Wexford for much of his life. "

Cheers Darigan (talk) 10:29, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not notable. I found this on the UK site boxrec.com, but it says of its subject, "nationality United Kingdom" and makes no mention of Wexford, nor Ireland at all. Can find nothing else online. --candyworm (talk) 16:05, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cry Before Dawn

An anon editor here added an entry for the 1980's pop group Cry Before Dawn to the "People" section of this article. I reverted on the basis that the section was intended to list people from Wexford, not rock bands. Subsequently user Jongleur100 reverted my edit here claiming in her edit summary, "They are notable enough to have a Wiki article. If you remove them you will have to delete the entire section." I have no interest in wasting my own and other people's time in a petty edit war, but is it clear to no-one but me that this section "People" is is called "People" because it is meant to contain a list of people (only)? Is the solution to rename the section to "People and rock bands"? I don't think so. If the band is really worthy of inclusion in this article, then mention needs to be placed elsewhere, perhaps in a new section "Wexford in popular culture"; compare the Acton, Greater London article, where mention of The Who is found in its "Acton in popular culture" section. It seems clear that, only if individual members are notable, should a link to their articles be placed in the "People" section. Is there any precedent for taking a different approach? --candyworm (talk) 14:56, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done, on the basis that silence is consensus. --candyworm (talk) 22:38, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Wexford. 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 http://www.webcitation.org/5nfUzbJO8?url=http://www.rte.ie/weather/presenters/flemingg.html to http://www.rte.ie/weather/presenters/flemingg.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) 16:10, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Wexford. 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: 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) 00:47, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yola name in lead

I am opening this thread because, while the extinct Yola language (Forth and Bargy dialect) version of the subject's name is correctly reflected and cited in the body, it was recently added to the lead. (In prominent position - effectively the 4th word in the article). I have removed this because it:

was incorrectly included in the Template:Irish place name. Which is for Irish language placenames. As expected by the related TEMPLATE DOCs
was not adequately or clearly marked as an archaic name. As expected by WP:PLACE#General guidelines.
is not "frequently used" or (IMO) "important enough to be valuable to readers" for such prominent placement. As expected by WP:PLACE.
is an example of the issues covered by MOS:LEADCLUTTER

If others feel strongly enough about inclusion (to the extent that they feel each of the above guidelines should be overridden or ignored), then please consider contributing here. So the proposed change can be discussed. And, if there is consensus that a change is needed, it can be agreed where and how to apply that change. Guliolopez (talk) 20:29, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Julio. Yes I think speaking to a number of people from Wexford it would be a contribution to add archaic names, particularly languages which are important to the local heritage of the area from a historical perspective. The article you speak of clearly states "The lead: The title can be followed in the first line by a list of alternative names in parentheses, e.g.: Gulf of Finland (Estonian: Soome laht; Finnish: Suomenlahti; Russian: Финский залив, Finskiy zaliv; Swedish: Finska viken) is a large bay in the easternmost arm of the Baltic Sea.

Any archaic names in the list (including names used before the standardization)"

Thus making it clearly permissible to add archaic names to the list as long as theyre labelled as such, so I dont see youre point on this one. Perhaps you could explain your reasoning for exception to the rules to us all? and your grounds for such, thanks Erelóane (talk) 17:12, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to the above refering to your point two, I also refer to your reasoning in point 3 above, which is clearly addressing title only. Please refer to: "Nevertheless, other names, especially those used significantly often (say, 10% of the time or more) in the available English literature on a place, past or present, should be mentioned in the article, as encyclopedic information" with particular emohasis on the terms "past or present". Thus confirming past names can indeed be used in the article text. Erelóane (talk) 17:32, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. And welcome to Wikipedia. As noted, my concern with the addition in September 2021 was that it was added to the "irish place name" template (but wasn't Irish), wasn't clear that it was an archaic name (as expected by the guideline immediately below the "Gulf of Finland" example quoted from) and was generally a bit of a mess (adding MOS:LEADCLUTTER).

While your recent addition doesn't have all of these issues, I do not see how it is clear that the new addition represents an archaic name? (Where, in that addition, is it clarified that Yola is an archaic dialect of Middle English that hasn't been spoken in Wexford in at least 150 years?).

(FYI - In your note above you include a snippet from the guideline ("Any archaic names in the list (including names used before the standardization of English orthography)"..). However, in an error which doesn't reflect what the guideline actually states, you've left out the part of the sentence with the verb - and the actual guidance on archaic names: "Any archaic names in the list (including names used before the standardization of English orthography) should be clearly marked as such, i.e., (archaic: name1)". [Emphasis mine].

How does your addition fit with this part of the guidance? The (actual/material) bit that you appear to have left out? About making it clear that an archaic name is an archaic name? Guliolopez (talk) 21:09, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Failed verification

In a recent change, text was added to state that "Wexford town therefore served as an important centre for both [Irish and Yola?]". With a reference to "A Brief History of Languages in County Wexford: As we used to say" (Mernagh; 2008). What page or section of this work is this statement based upon? I ask because:

There are few mentions of Wexford town, specifically, in this work. Where it is mentioned, for example on page 156 of the journal article, Mernagh writes that "Wexford town was an important commercial port situated strategically on the route from Bristol and Cornwall to Newfoundland. As such it would have been largely English speaking". Which, if anything, would appear to state something incompatible with the recent addition?
There are few mentions of places where spoken Irish/Yola "intersected". However, on page 152 of the article, Mernagh writes that "Taghmon straddles the border of Shelmalere West with Bargy. In the 15th century, it was the cultural gateway between Gaelic Ireland and Yola-speaking south Wexford". Implying that Taghmon (12km away or more), rather than Wexford town, was a "[notable] centre for both [Irish and Yola]". Rather than Wexford town?

What am I missing? How/where does the provided reference support the recently added text? Guliolopez (talk) 15:17, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to relying on Mernagh (2008) to support the assertion about "Wexford town being an important centre for both Irish and Yola", in this edit summary an anon editor states that "citation 5" (Colfer (2002)) supports an assertion that the "main language spoken in [the area] was Leinster Irish". I have restored the removed {{fact}} tag, and expanded it, on the basis that the term "Leinster Irish" doesn't appear anywhere in that source. Least of all as the "main language" of the area. As before, any involved editors are more than welcome to help clarify (ideally with quotes from and reference to specific sections of the sources) how these sources support these additions. Declaring that the text is supported by the entirety of the source (a form of WP:SYNTH) or implying that editors haven't read/reviewed the source (when I have) is less than helpful in addressing the raised concerns. As, frankly, are the kind of "you don't know what you're talking about so stop editing" declarations. (I can and have read the sources. They do not support the text. If they do, which parts of them do?). Thanks. Guliolopez (talk) 18:47, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]