Talk:Tyrconnell

Ireland Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Northern Ireland Low‑importance

	Northern Ireland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Northern Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Northern 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.Northern IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject Northern IrelandTemplate:WikiProject Northern IrelandNorthern Ireland-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Merge from Tír Conaill[edit]

(From discussion at Talk:Cenél Conaill. Pairadox 17:18, 27 August 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Apparantly the proposed merger (september 2006) haven't raised many comments. For what it's worth, in my adaption of these articles for no:wiki I have merged them, and also included some info from Tyrconnel. Finnrind 11:29, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- Strongly Disagree with any merger

Aatomic1 02:43, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aatomic1, I find it a little surprising that you have removed a tag proposing a merger, placed by another user october 2006, I thought it was custumary that such proposals should be discussed before they were dismissed. Further, after your edits this article now states that Tir Conaill was founded in the 5th Century, by Niall(died ca 400) as opposed to the traditional view that it was founded by his son Conall, for whom it was named. Could you please take some time to explain your edits. Regards Finnrind 04:54, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have compared my adjustments with the article as last edited (by yourself). That article states Tir Conaill was founded in the 5th Century, by Niall (died c455) and I have not changed this. I dont have any opinion and if you feel the original article was incorrect it would be helpful if you could correct. Re the merger tag; it had been there for 6 months without comment.

Aatomic1 20:11, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your explanation. My latest edit was simply adding iw:no, the articles statement was slightly different from what you qoute above but still confusing and inaccurate. I apoligise for blaming you for this inaccuracy. I have tried to harmonise the article now according to the articles about Niall and Tir Conaill. Re the merger tag the guidelines might differ from language to language, as it was not placed by myself and I do not have any strong opinions about this myself, I rest my case ;-). Happy editing, Finnrind 20:50, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article on Tír Conaillshould absolutely not be merged with that of Cenel Conaill, but rather with the much more extensive article on Tyrconnell, which is the common vernacular anglicised version of the Gaelic original Tir Conaill. They refer to the same territory, whereas Cenel Conaill refers to the related kinship group. Seneschally 16:55, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely agree with the above, No merge' Tir Conaill is geographical, whereas Cenel Conaill is a kindred that was supra-national, with members becoming part of the Royal Houses of Scotland, England, Norway and France. Agree with the merge of Tyrconnel and Tir Conaill, however where is the "ponc séimhithe" of the "Conaill" Brendandh 11:37, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requested Move[edit]

This article has been renamed from Tyrconnel to Tyrconnell as the result of a move request.

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was - uncontested move. Keith D (talk) 23:19, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Given that the word 'Tyrconnel' is used in the article only once (in reference to the Dukedom), should this not be moved to 'Tyrconnell' which is by far the most common modern spelling and is used by all the other explanations of what Tyrconnell is in the article itslef? Donegal92 (talk) 23:08, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Move - House of Scandal (talk) 16:31, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Disambiguation page?[edit]

Is this article actually discussing Tyrconnell, or is it a disambiguation page with all the articles in one? It is very sloppy this way, and does not give any information specific to one Tyrconnell. 213.202.164.104 (talk) 20:56, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested clean-up[edit]

This article is a mess. It started out as a DAB page but went askew. Now it is neither a DAB page nor a proper article, just random information thrown together. I suggest that a DAB page be created, following Wikipedia standards, to list the various relevant Tyrconnells, and this article be re-written so that it makes sense. Any comments? Hohenloh⁺ 14:59, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page have been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:22, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]