Talk:Buttevant

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Buttevant Barracks: Hi all, I am going to write a section on the barracks in Buttevant, I am wondering whether I should put this text in the main Buttevant article or to just put a link to it?



Untitled[edit]

Added the note about Ollie Reed - 11:11, 20 September 2005 (UTC)


Can you please do the link thing for Canon Sheenan (Patrick Augustine Sheehan) and for the two Irish writers? Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.43.58.100 (talk • contribs) .

  • Hello,

I'm unsure whom to address this to as the contributors have neither a user name nor a page, which I feel should be obligatory. Buttevant appears to have an over load of content. I began to give up reading half way through. One suggestion might be (please don't bash me) to set up a seperate page on the history of the de Barry clan (see Tralee and the Desmonds), also one for the Horse Fair ?.Osioni 15:48, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree here, the amount of information on Buttevant is ludicrous, almost like someone cut and pasted an old newspaper report. I strongly recommend that at the very least the Horse Fair information should be on a new page.

A lot of information is very bloated, or to be blunt, not necessary at all. We don't need three paragraphs and a poem on the origin of the town's name. The Franciscan Friary and Ballybeg Priory should be completely removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.134.52.11 (talk • contribs)

  • In that case, then why not start Cahirmee Fair, move the relevant text and put a synopsis of one line or two in here with a 'main article' link? Anyone have any objections? - Ali-oops✍ 05:55, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • None here. In fact, feel free to remove a few paragraphs in other areas. Personally I'd remove everything but the summary and misc, and move the rest to other sections. Other articles on towns like Mallow are literally less than half the size of Buttevant's. 159.134.52.220 00:27, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • It sure seems like a quality article to me. All that history associated with a single place is just not the sort of thing you come across every day. I am not sure that other towns have this sort backrgoung to them and it does not take a long time to write aboyut them because there ain't so much to write - it could be like that with Mallow although I don't know the place. I'm, for leaving averything as it is - and maybe adding a bit more. The proposal is too severe. If you go on removing the quality out of Wikipedia what is goin to left in the end? Not much I suspect.
  • Quality is not quantity. The reason you don't come across history associated with most articles is because it's usually in its own section. For example, Ballybeg Priory - not a single mention of Buttevent in that section! Therefore why isn't it in a separate Wiki article instead of being 1100 word irrelevant anecdote? To put this in context, take a look at the Cork City article. It has a one paragraph entry on the history of Cork, with a link to a seperate "History of Cork" article. You don't just throw everything into one article - one of Wikipedia's mandates. 159.134.52.113 13:19, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another issue of mine - if you're not familar with the Munster region, how on earth are you supposed to know what the "episcopal Barony of Orrery and Kilmore in the County Cork, Ireland." is? 159.134.52.113 13:18, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • If you are in Canton and are not familiar with Ireland how on earth are you supposed to know what Ireland is? Nothing to stop you drawing up a list of the Baronies in Ireland and explaining their position on a map. It would be a USEFUL exercise.

Article split up.[edit]

I split the Buttevant article up, and added four new sections to make it easier for users to navigate and get relevant information.

FearTheClaw 19:32, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • What did you do with the picture of the military establishment? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.43.58.100 (talk • contribs)
    • Must have gone missing in the move. I'll re-instate it on the relevant page! - Ali-oops✍ 18:02, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I was beginning to fear that there might have been an ideological twist to its disappearance. But what is now to be done about the history of the establishment itself? The approach to this article is rather like that of the pointilliste school (pointillism), such as Cross or Seurat. The end is greater than the sum of the elements - you have to stand back from the dots to see the greater picture.
  • P.S. The picture of St. Mary's Church is also gone missing!—Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.43.58.100 (talk • contribs)
    • Tsk, tsk. Added back in!! - Ali-oops✍ 18:43, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Apologies for the image loss, that was unintentional. FearTheClaw 21:21, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • Not to worry - it happens. I like what you did with the restructuring. Well done! - Ali-oops✍ 23:21, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
          • A claw back!
  • Now we are missing the text referring to the honours of Barry family (Viscount Buttevant and Earl of Barrymore). Where has that gone to?
    • That text was removed before I made any changes. I found it in one of Buttevant's previous versions and added it to the De_Barry_Family section.FearTheClaw 20:51, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article would seem overly long. Buttevant has a population of around 1,000 yet this article is as long as some cities' entries in WP. There is also a POV bias particularly towards the British military presence.Coolavokig (talk) 19:43, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Clotilde Graves[edit]

The short essay on Clotilde Graves is interesting, but belongs in the Clotilde Graves article, not this one. Her relevance to Buttevant is only her birth, and this article should mention only that and the fact that she was a well-known writer, with an appropriate wikilink. Deipnosophista (talk) 11:23, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Buttevant. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 11:01, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Buttevant. 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) 01:19, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Buttevant&oldid=1200484992"