Talk:Belfast Blitz

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

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Spot87 (talk • contribs) 21 May 2006.

First Edit[edit]

I found it difficult to write the 'human cost' paragraph. There were too many tragic stories. In the end I opted to repeat quotes from primary sources which are in several books.

Dr Brian Barton has published most on this topic, however there are instances where he seems to have a 'orange' tinge to his writing.

I didn't include 'ditching', it was difficult to summarise. For months some people left the city every night and slept in ditches with a deterioration in hygine, manners, etc

There are different accounts as to who sent the telegram to whom. It probably was sent to the Dublin City manager rather than to deV. For now I opted to follow what many books say.

It would be good to get photos of the blitz. Plenty exist. But they seem to be copyright.

I left out later discussions. deV wanted to help. Offers were rejected. e.g. joining the electricity grids - at the time the south had a surplus of power from ard na crusha

I left out discrimination in - for example the 'home guard' (Dad's Army) had to take an oath which effectively excluded nationalists

Ok, any suggestions? --ClemMcGann 09:45, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Good work, Clem.

Lapsed Pacifist 15:55, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded. --Red King 19:20, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This is an excellent article. Thank you. (anonymous but grateful, January 24 2007)

After the blitz came a post war housing boom consisting of estates like newbarnsley ballymurphy highfield e.t.c , I remember as a kid asking my father why we had such strong coalsheds they where the size and height of a large bedroom with an 8 inch thick concrete roof and all just to store 2 or 3 bags of coal ! I was told that after the war designers where told to add these as ready made bomb shelters , of course back then they would probably not have forseen the threat of all out nuclear war —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.12.228.66 (talk • contribs)

Auto peer review suggestions[edit]

Belfast Blitz[edit]

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and may or may not be accurate for the article in question.

  • Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at WP:LEAD. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.[1]
  • Per WP:CONTEXT and WP:MOSDATE, months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.
  • Per WP:MOS, avoid using words/phrases that indicate time periods relative to the current day. For example, recently and yesterday might be terms that should be replaced with specific dates/times.[2]
  • See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.[3]
  • Per WP:WIAFA, Images should have concise captions.[4]
  • There may be an applicable infobox for this article. For example, see Template:Infobox Biography, Template:Infobox School, or Template:Infobox City.[5] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
  • Per WP:MOSNUM, there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 18mm, use 18 mm, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 18 mm.[6]
  • Per WP:CONTEXT and WP:BTW, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006, but do not link January 2006.[7]
  • As per WP:MOSDATE, dates shouldn't use th; for example, instead of using January 30th was a great day, use January 30 was a great day.
  • Per WP:MOS#Headings, headings generally do not start with the word "The". For example, ==The Biography== would be changed to ==Biography==.
  • Please reorder/rename the last few sections to follow guidelines at WP:GTL.
  • Per WP:WIAFA, this article's table of contents (ToC) maybe too long- consider shrinking it down by merging short sections or using a proper system of daughter pages as per WP:SS.[8]
  • Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
    • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
  • You may wish to convert your form of references to the cite.php footnote system that WP:WIAFA 2(c) highly recommends.
  • Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that the it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 2a. [9]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Mal 06:30, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ See footnote
  2. ^ See footnote
  3. ^ See footnote
  4. ^ See footnote
  5. ^ See footnote
  6. ^ See footnote
  7. ^ See footnote
  8. ^ See footnote
  9. ^ See footnote

Fair use rationale for Image:Basilbrookeborough.jpg[edit]

Image:Basilbrookeborough.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:51, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced statements[edit]

I removed some statements which had references, but when the references were followed did not support the statements. User:ClemMcGann then but them back, so I have removed them again. Please don't put these statements back unless actual references that support them can be found. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:13, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am surprised that any editor would remove a section which has been in the article from its first inception with the comment remove unreferenced bollocks. This article predates our citation templates, nonetheless a reference was given in the form of a footnote. If you doubted the words then a 'citation required' could have been applied. When I restored the article I cited an extract from the original reference. [1] It is, as the cite says "Extracts from an article on The Belfast Blitz, 1941. By Jonathan Bardon. Lecturer of History, Queens University, Belfast." (who has written and broadcast extensively on this subject) You now say "when the references were followed did not support the statements".

Perhaps you could say which? Will you now restore the paragraphs?

ClemMcGann (talk) 19:36, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I apologise if this seemed tiresome or heavy-handed. Most of the stuff I remove from Wikipedia doesn't deserve any time spent on it. This article accidentally went the same way.

When I removed the text that I did, the only 'reference' given was a superscript "1". Reference number 1 was to a BBC Online article which in no way supported the statements made. I don't think there was any way that I could have deduced that an unnumbered footnote was meant to be the reference. The footnote is also unclear as to what kind of publication the reference is. Is it a book? An article? A lecture? Is Bardon representitive of historians of this subject?

I also think that the text as it stood before I edited it is poor quality. It's not clear to me if the 'crisis' that the government was allegedly unprepared for was the war, or the bombing. The relevance of Craigavon is unclear, since he died months before the bombing. The 'bullet point' style of writing is open to misinterpretation. If we wish to show that the government of Northern Ireland was unprepared for a bombing then surely it would be better to quote figures about shelters built, AA batteries in place, or other preparations rather than quoting what Lady Londonderry said about the chief minister. I have no problem with you improving the article. DJ Clayworth (talk) 20:42, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Apology accepted & point taken. Bardon has written extensively on this subject. The article could improve better references. The publication was a pamphlet which derived from a lecture. He has since published a book with the same title. ClemMcGann (talk) 21:00, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Map[edit]

The image which shows Belfast Lough could be improved if Dublin, Belfast and a scale were also shown - at present this map is a bit scanty. This would then illustrate the two cities' relationship to each other.

I would do it myself, but lack the knowledge. So, any takers ? RASAM (talk) 13:43, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Alsoma map of the route taken by the bombers would be most useful, for example did they fly up the Irish Sea? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.203.254.1 (talk) 10:45, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

City centre bombardment[edit]

From all accounts I have read the city centre suffered more damage in the 4/5 May "Fire Raid". The article states that Bridge Street was "effectively obliterated" in the 15/16 April Easter raid but on that occasion the Luftwaffe had turned its full force onto North Belfast districts especially the New Lodge, Antrim Road, Lower Shankill and York Street. Their targets were the Waterworks, Victoria Barracks and mills. The section in the second raid needs to be expanded to include the devastation visited upon East Belfast, city centre and the Harland and Wolff shipyard.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:13, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Belfast Blitz/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)Press [show] to view →
The article about the Blitz on Belfast seems to written from somewhere south of the border and is then followed by a further reaction from the South. This is followed by the firemen returning where? The South. I think the Project heading explains it all: Wikipedia Ireland. Is there no Wikipedia UK?

On the substance of the article itself on the Belfast Blitz, the criticism of the Unionist Government of the time is inaccurate and unfair - par for the course, then. The fact is, no Northern Ireland administration has ever had control of Defence. No Belfast Government has ever had a Ministry of Defence. That is based in London and always has been. Stormont could not control searchlights or anti-aircraft guns because that is the responsiblity of the Army, which is controlled in London. Similarly, air defence, night fighters etc., are allocated to the RAF from London.

The record of Northern Ireland in World War II is wholly creditable, whereas south of the border, it was not only the IRA who 'frollicked' with the Nazis. Plenty of constitutional Nationalists were up to their eyes in it. So from their point of view, they have an axe to grind about Northern Ireland on this matter (or any other). Only last year, the President of the Irish Republic (who styles herself 'President of Ireland') pronounced that Northern Ireland's Unionist population were 'Nazis'.

Last edited at 17:53, 25 October 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 09:21, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Belfast Blitz. 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) 04:21, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Belfast Blitz. 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) 20:02, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Belfast Blitz. 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) 09:07, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Easter Eggs for Belfast"[edit]

Is there any conformation from a credible source that William Joyce ever made such a comment ? A lot of comments attributed to Joyce tended to be of dubious veracity and not backed up by reports/transcripts from official monitoring services. Joyce's broadcasts were monitored by the BBC, Irish Army and (US) Foreign Broadcast Intelligence service so the If such a comment were ever actually broadcast there is likely to be a record of it somewhere. 109.144.221.170 (talk) 21:33, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Belfast_Blitz&oldid=1206225975"