Wikipedia

Talk:Connacht

Latest comment: 2 months ago by 2A01:6F02:333:35F1:BCB4:61E0:5BAC:CA33 in topic to Hell or Connaught
Learn more about this page

The spelling of Connacht

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Connacht spelling used in the article as it is by far the most common version used, rather than the older english spelling of Connaught.

Hmm...I've always seen "Connaught." Certainly the latter is not merely a "little-used old English spelling". john 08:59, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Connaught has 268,000 references in google, while "Connacht" has only 103,000. (Some of the references to Connaught do not, however, refer to the Irish province) The "Connaught" spelling is, however, used by various Irish sites, including the Connaught Telegraph, presumably a newspaper published in the region...my Rand-McNally atlas, which is usually pretty good about using the contemporary spellings, also uses "Connaught". I tend to think it ought to be moved to "Connaught". john 09:02, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Connaught is to Connacht what Peking is to Beijing. In phases during the twentieth century a group of clumsily anglicised gaelic names (Leix for Laois, Dunleary for Dun Laoghaire) were phased out (in reality, binned) and replaced by their original gaelic anticedents. Connaught is one of these. It remained in usage until the mid-20th century before being respelt in the original gaelic, which is now the correct form in both Irish and english. Part of the change was linked to the introduction of a new latin alphabet into Irish. My 'wikipedia' surname in old Irish used to be spelt Ó Dubtaig (with a dot over the b and g.) For decades now it has been spelt as Ó Dubhthaigh, the dot (I forget the technical term for it) having indicated a place where a h was pronounced but not written in the old gaelic script. Connacht is the correct modern name and has been for decades. Connaught is an old and bad anglicisation akin to Peking. Connaught is still used by people internationally unaware of or uncomfortable with the change, just as they still write Dunleary. (Indeed a small group still call Dun Laoghaire Kingstown and Cobh (which itself was wrongly anglicised as Cove at one stage). But while it was OK to write Connaught until I think the 1960s, just as it was OK to write Peking until the 1970s, both are now old anglicised versions that are incorrect to use today.

As to google searches, google searches here as in so many other areas, are worthless. Most websites are based in the US and reflect US linguistic usage. Connaught is still widely used by Irish-Americans who always read that spelling and continue to use it, their image of Ireland and its nomenclature reflecting inherited definitions, colloquialisms and spellings rather than a contemporary usage. On a side point, that is why, even though the people on the island had long disowned the use of voilence, Irish-Americans tended to be more supportive of the IRA and such groups, they seeing them not as modern Irish people saw them, namely as terrorists, but as 'freedom fighters' akin to those who fought for Irish independence under the same name 80 years ago. It is said about Irish-America that it is usually three to four generations behind Ireland in attitudes. Hence Irish-Americans, to give another example, tend to place heavy emphasis on Roman Catholicism, on Pearse, the Fenians, the Easter Rising, etc., whereas contemporary Ireland is abandoning RCism, has less of an interest in the Irish language (more people in the island speak Chinese as a first language than Irish) and are less enamoured of traditional republicanism. Irish Americans visiting Ireland for the first time are astonished to find empty churches, no Easter Rising Parades anymore and the President of Ireland attending Royal British Legion Remembrance Day ceremonies in St. Patrick's Cathedral. (And they were flabbergasted last year to find Alex Maskey, the Sinn Féin Lord Mayor of Belfast, laying a Remembrance Day wreath in honour of Northern Irish soldiers who died in the First World War, fighting for the British!)

Which is a roundabout way of saying - Connacht is the modern correct spelling in Irish and english, Connaught an out of date anglicisation no longer used in Ireland or among those with contact with Ireland. Connaught is simply an old bad anglicisation still used among the Irish diaspora (largely in the US), their usage of the old spelling reflecting their tendency to be out of step with contemporary Irish attitudes to spelling, language, religion, politics, Anglo-Irish relations and much else besides. And google, as it is prone to do, reflects the cultural and linguistic norms of website creators (largely US orientated) not accuracy. But accuracy is the bottom line in an encyclopædia. Here endeth the lesson. :-) FearÉIREANN 23:38, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Re the atlas, it is depressing but not surprising. I guess even those who should have done their homework better sometimes don't. The fact that they use Baile Atha Cliath for Dublin suggests they are still using names copied from older maps circa mid-20th century. At that stage, many Irish towns adopted the Irish version of the name as the official version as an attempt to force Irish usage on an unwilling populace. So though the world had heard of the Book of Kells, Kells itself on maps was called the rather ludicrous Ceannanas Mór. (That too was binned in the 1980s.) But Baile Átha Cliath never took off on maps, Ceannanas Mór even less so and have long been binned. It sounds like some map makers should stop simply transposing old map names unto new maps and start from scratch with what is used now, not what was used up to the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. Or maybe, because of the similarity between Connacht and Connaught, they presumed that one was the Irish language version, one the English. If so they are mistaken. Connacht is the correct verion in both Irish and english, Connaught the old, now unused badly anglicised version akin to Peking. FearÉIREANN 23:38, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Hmm...well you've certainly convinced me that the article should be at Connacht. However, I think that the article should begin with "Connacht (sometimes Connaught)", or something like that. Peking (and also the very rarely used Pekin and Pei-ching) is bolded in the Wiki article on Beijing, for instance. john 00:47, 22 Dec 2003 (UTC)
While I am quite happy to see the article at Connacht, I would balk at saying that Connaught is a bad anglicisation of its sound. Remember that 'gh' was originally pronounced as 'ch' in English words like 'right', 'light', 'ought', 'rough' etc -- in fact it still is in Scots. So the 'Connaught' spelling would have been pronounced in exactly the same way as the 'Connacht' spelling at the time when it was introduced -- not using its modern 'Connott' pronunciation. Linguistic changes in English over the last few hundred years may have made 'Connaught' a misleading spelling for modern English speakers who expect 'gh' to be silent, but it wasn't always so. -- Derek Ross
I agree that Connacht is the better choice for this entry. My family lived in Ireland from 1980 to 1982, and I visited them during summer vacations. At that time, the form Connacht was the only one I observed in publications, etc. It was only later that I came across the form Connaught (I had a similar experience with the Laois/Leix example cited above; I believe that was also spelled "Laoighis" before orthographic reform took place). Furthermore, the Library of Congress authority file (http://authorities.loc.gov) prefers Connacht to Connaught, citing a few reference sources in support of that decision. Nevertheless, I can see why doubts would remain. The GEOnet name server still gives Connaught as the authorized form, with Connacht as a variant.
In addition, I notice that the section on the Duke of Connaught duplicates information in the Duke of Connaught article. Could the former be deleted without harm? Or if it is felt that Connacht and the Duke of Connaught should be linked, could that be managed with a little less repetition? -- Flauto Dolce 15:15, 1 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I'd say a link to Duke of Connaught would be sufficient. john 20:52, 1 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Quote: 1 The change in spelling was in part a result of a change in the use of script in Irish from Gaelic to Latin lettering. Many names and spellings of names were changed as a result. Connaught, which was based on an anglicisation of Connacht (the acht is pronounced as aught), was phased out from official usage and the Gaelic Connacht used in both the Irish and English languages. The older spelling is still used by some internationally, though its usage is in decline.

The change really has nothing to do with Gaelic v. Latin lettering: as far as Connacht is concerned, that merely changed "c with a dot" to "ch".
"the acht is prounced as aught": no, it isn't (except by some English speakers. In Ireland the reverse is true: where "Connaught" is still used the aught is pronounced acht. -- 217.44.142.112 17:39, 8 May 2004 (UTC)Reply
The change was not merely Gaelic to Latin lettering (including using h instead of a dot to modify consonant sound), but also standardising Irish spelling (there were a great many irregularities before this). Thus, all sorts of spelling rules/traditions changed.
In general there is some amount of confusion when using Anglicisations. For example, both Lehinch and Lahinch are seen on roadsigns around An Leacht, both Ennistymon and Ennistimon. In recent years the govt. has even messed up Irish placenames, with Mala standing as a re-Gaelicisation of Mallow (itself an Anglicisation of Magh Ealla). Some particular places, as mentioned earlier, came in for special attention and attempts were made to use only the Irish, not the English. Some were successful (Port Laoise instead of Maryborough, Dún Laoghaire instead of Kingstown, Cóbh instead of Queenstown), others not as unanimously (Rath Luirc sometimes for Charleville, Muine Bheag sort of replacing Bagenalstown but not completely, Ceannanas Mór didn't take over from Kells).
Connaught/Connacht is definitely in the latter category. Not completely successful, but Connacht is not confined only to official use either. So using Connacht makes sense, as it is used officially, and often colloquially also.
Oh, as regards Google? Searching only Irish pages: 45,600 for Connaught, 69,800 for Connacht.
zoney ♣ talk 13:51, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
That pattern 2:3 pattern is repeated in Irish government pages too (including some in Irish): 632 for Connaught [1] and 1070 for Connacht [2] and 4 for Connachta. So difficult to say Connaught is never used officially. --Henrygb 23:27, 26 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

The Eagle of Connacht

edit
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Flag- Some info on the flag would be good. For example why an Irish province has half of the "Albanian eagle" or the "Byzantine/Orthodox Eagle" on its flag?

Erm. It's just half of some random eagle-ish bird that suffices. The closest I could find to common representations was the one from the Albanian flag. It's not some official link or tradition. Just to clarify.
zoney ♣ talk 13:51, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

- I found a flag that looks less Albanian if you're interested... http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/ie-conn.html --Thano 08:50, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

That is a copyrighted work. If you can find a free-licence Connacht flag, or obtain suitable permission - go ahead. The reason for my creating a new flag and using the Albanian flag's eagle was to have a GFDL flag. zoney ♣ talk 11:45, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Um, Zoney, have you some evidence that just any ol' half-raptor will do? Evertype 22:20, 5 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

Technically speaking...

edit
Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

'Which is a roundabout way of saying - Connacht is the modern correct spelling in Irish and english' this is not quite true, although it is a common misconception. The nominative case for Connacht in the Irish is Connachta, not Connacht. Connacht, in Irish, is the genitive case e.g. Cúige Chonnacht. El Gringo 01:34, 11 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Whether they are right or not, official Ireland says that the Irish spelling is "Connacht". See http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_3166-2_newsletter_ii-1_corrected_2010-02-19.pdf ISO 3166-2 Newsletter II-1. Wikipedia has to be source based, not based on what editors think is correct. The source here is "Ordnance Survey Office, Dublin 1993" (as listed by the ISO itself).I will amend the article accordingly. Frenchmalawi (talk) 14:41, 30 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Early History of Connacht

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

It would be good to review the "early history" section for content which is mythological, rather than historical. Perhaps a "Connacht Mythology" section would be in order. Renglish (talk) 03:04, 29 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

y

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
  • 1226. Nuala, daughter of Roderic O'Conor, and Queen of Ulidia, died at Conga Fechin Cong, and was honourably interred in the church of the Canons at Cong.
  • 1230. Melaghlin Mac Firedinn, a noble priest and a professor of literature, died in his monastic noviciate in the monastery of Boyle.
  • 1235. Madden O'Madden, Lord of Sil-Anmchadha, died.
  • 1236. Mulmurry O'Laghtnan was appointed to the bishopric of Tuam, and went to England, where he was consecrated, after having received the Pope's letters, by consent of the King of England.
  • 1238. Felix O'Rooney, Archbishop of Tuam, after having some time before resigned his bishopric for the sake of God, and after having assumed the monastic habit in Kilmurry Mary's Abbey, in Dublin, died.
  • 1241. Bishop O'Flaherty (i.e. Murtough), i.e. the Bishop of Annadown, died.
  • 1243. Malone O'Creghan Crean, Archdeacon of Tuam, after having returned across the sea as a professor, died in Dublin.
  • 1244. The Archdeacon of Tuam was drowned in the Glaislinn of Cluain.
  • 1245. Donnell O'Flanagan, Abbot of Cong, died.
  • 1247. Conor O'Murray, Bishop of Hy-Fiachraclh Aidhne Kilmacduaggh, died at Bristol.
  • 1247. Finola, daughter of Roderic O'Conor, died at Conga-Fechin Cong.
  • 1248. Dermot O'Cuana, the great priest of Elphin, died, and was buried at Kilmore.
  • 1249. Mulmurry O'Laghtnan, Archbishop of Tuam, a proficient in the canon law, died in winter, a short time before Christmas.
  • 1250. Thomas O'Meallaigh, Bishop of Annadown, died.
  • 1255. O'Laidig, Erenagh of Annadown, died.
  • 1256. Gilla-an-Choimhdheadh O'Kinnfaela, Abbot of Annadown, died.
  • 1256. O'Gillaran, Abbot of Trinity Church at Tuam, died.
  • 1258. The Bishop's palace at Elphin, and the palace of Kilsesin, were demolished by Hugh O'Conor.
  • 1268. Hugh, son of Conor O'Flaherty, Official of Annadown, died.
  • 1269. Christina, daughter of O'Naghtan, and wife of Dermot Midheach Mac Dermot, the most hospitable and chaste woman of her tribe, and the most bountiful to the order of Grey Friars, died, after the victory of penance.
  • 1270. Tany More, son of Duinnin, son of Nedhe, son of Conaing Boy O'Mulconry, was elected to the chief ollavship of Connaught; and the ollavships of Dubhshuileach O'Mulconry and Dunlang O'Mulconry were abolished.
  • 1297. William O'Duffy, Bishop of Clonfert, fell from his horse, and died in consequence.
  • 1304. Conor, son of Hugh O'Conor, was slain by Hubert O'Flaherty, after he had acted treacherously towards Donough O'Flaherty. Hubert was killed in retaliation immediately after this.
  • 1306. Donough O'Flaherty, Bishop of Killala, the most eminent of the Irish for piety, died at Dunbuinne, on his way to Dublin, and was interred with honour at Mullingar, in the house of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
  • 1328. Thomas O'Meallaigh, Bishop of Annadown, died at Rome.

Just for now. Fergananim (talk) 02:12, 27 March 2010 (UTC)Reply


z

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Lough Ce

edit

LC1531.12 Tuathal O'Domhnallain, from Machaire-Maenmhaighe, mortuus est.

I don't think this article has enough italics

edit
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

/s —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.224.181.201 (talk) 15:30, 9 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

The Annals of Ulster

edit
Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Why is there so much detail from the Annals of Ulster on this page? Would it not make more sense to link to (or create) another article on this subject? As it is the useful information in this piece is swamped by sections on the Annals. Laconic Loiner (talk) 13:12, 5 July 2012 (UTC)Reply

Yes, it's completely over the top in this article. A summary is needed, with a link to a new "main article". SixtyNineSixtySix (talk) 22:11, 19 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
Done. Barryjjoyce (talk) 03:19, 4 September 2014 (UTC)Reply

Pronunciation

edit
Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

A similar question to that of spelling is pronunciation. As of now, only the anglicised pronunciation is given, but many in Ireland pronounce it /kɔnəxt/ even in English. I think this should be added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.93.193.53 (talk) 12:18, 7 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Connacht. 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) 15:52, 4 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Connacht. 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) 05:14, 12 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Requested move 13 August 2021

edit
Latest comment: 3 years ago35 comments13 people in discussion
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved per consensus. No such user (talk) 14:28, 24 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Connacht → Connaught – Connaught is the English name, Connacht is the Irish name, Wikipedia uses the English names for Ulster, Leinster and Munster (Not the Irish names: Ulaidh, Laighin and Mumhan). We need to fix this inconsistency. Connaught is also used by major websites like Google and Britannica. I am aware that “Connacht” is the official name in both English and Irish, but English Wikipedia uses the English name for places in the Republic of Ireland even when their not official like Dingle, Gweedore and Newbridge. (Instead of An Daingean, Gaoth Dobhair and Droichead). Ale3353 (talk) 07:16, 13 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

  • Oppose Both appear to be regularly used in English language sources (although Connaught seems to bring up just as many hits for the hotel in London as the Irish city. As the nomination notes, Connacht is also the official name in English as well. Between WP:COMMONNAME and WP:ENGVAR, I don't believe this move is warranted.--Yaksar (let's chat) 13:22, 13 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
  • Is it more common though? I'm finding the opposite (and many of the results for Connaught, including the first three on Google for me, are about the hotel in Mayfair). The current title appears to be used more in media both in the UK and in English-language sources abroad, in addition to official uses.--Yaksar (let's chat) 22:22, 14 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
Note: WikiProject Ireland has been notified of this discussion.  — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 10:54, 20 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose - the policy bases are clear, and the original argument is flawed. It is not about English and Irish but two forms in English. And for decades, the main form in English has been "Connacht". As evidenced above, by both usages in organisation and other names, and the NGRAM time-analysis. The title of a Dukedom (extinct) frozen in time over a century ago, is not relevant. We follow modern common usage, and you will only see "aught" in legacy-based sources. SeoR (talk) 11:13, 20 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
    • Britannica disagrees with you. As an encyclopedia it has far more credibility and reliability that this site. Just saying. Mabuska (talk) 11:51, 20 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
      • Thanks Mabuska, I think that actually rather neatly proves the point - this "full article", running to a very modest number of lines, is mostly about remote history - the only items more recent than the 17th century are the population numbers. And it refers to the country we all know as Ireland, per many discussions, as "the Irish republic", which shows how current some parts of Brittanica are in understanding naming relevant to Irish matters. On the first point, I don't really need to note than multiple sources might say that Wikipedia is often as good as, or better than, Brittanica and similar resources, not least because this encyclopedia is more responsive to changing understanding, and often digs in deeper. On the substantive point, it was different some decades back, as both spellings were more in use then, but usage has solidified, as noted by other above. SeoR (talk) 21:19, 20 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
        • Wikipedia is more responsive to changing understanding lol. In regards to certain topic areas it is a subtle or overt POV battleground used for propaganda by those that have the numbers to get their way. Not saying that this is the case here in this discussion, but Wikipedia is in no way as good or better than Britannica or similar sources in regards to contentious issues. As noted I'm not fused either way what this article is titled, both have merit. Mabuska (talk) 13:05, 22 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose per Guliolopez. Spleodrach (talk) 14:31, 20 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

@No such user: a better close statement should be used, a consensus means everyone agrees. There was an undecided and two supports out of nine votes. That's 33%. Hardly a consensus. And the last oppose is foul of Wikipedia standards by simply being a "per What he said". Mixed in with lack of evidence by both sides to actually prove their points. Mabuska (talk) 09:03, 25 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Per WP:CONSENSUS Consensus on Wikipedia does not mean unanimity (which is ideal but not always achievable), nor is it the result of a vote. I did not deem an extended closing statement necessary since the proposal and supports were rather free of evidence and were overwhelmingly opposed. Giuliolopez provided compelling evidence and argumentation in opposition and Nicknack009's ngram was also convincing enough. WP:PERX is generally considered a fine argument, asserting that X has provided substantial evidence, although it does not carry much weight. No such user (talk) 09:43, 25 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
@No such user: That's quite a good explanation. Mabuska (talk) 13:24, 28 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
Having said that one of the supporters of the move provided evidence that is quite strong [3]. Logainm is partnered with and funded by the Irish government's Department of Culture, Heritage and the Gaeltacht and provides nomenclature for them. Such evidence can't simply be flimsily ignored. Then again what does it matter what the state the area belongs to use when it comes to nomenclature, seeing as we're stuck with Derry rather than its official name according to its state. Mabuska (talk) 13:31, 28 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
As had already been pointed out, the official name was defined in 2003 by an Act of the Oireachtas, the Official Languages Act 2003 and Statuary Instrument 519/2003. According to the S.I., the name of the province in the English language is Connacht. Spleodrach (talk) 15:51, 28 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
Logainm is newer than your second source. The first which is also older than Logainm needs a better link to actually provide the statement being used as evidence as it's just a load of links at the moment. And no your !vote isn't "perfectly" valid. As stated I couldn't care less what this article is named as both have valid merits, but Devil's Advocate and all. My key point in my previous post was that Logainm is evidence that should not be so easily ignored. My other point is that 'official' is commonly ignored on this site. Did you know that Logainm was accepted as a valid and recommended source for Irish place names on Wikipedia in a (quite old now) IMOS discussion (that I was a main contribuator in) and as far as I'm aware it hasn't been overwritten. So if good enough for Irish names it's good enough for English names. Don't think you were about then but the (now admin) RA with what was effectively OR messaged them directly and posted their response on their status on such matters. In what was quite a heated and lengthily discussed debate we accepted it. Must dig it up. Mabuska (talk) 03:07, 29 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
On IMOS, it actually settles this issue, so any change to Connacht would need to be through discussion there. Mabuska (talk) 10:21, 29 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
My !vote was and remains perfectly valid, no matter how many times you denigrate it. Yes, IMOS says use Connacht for the province, so IMOS and the official name are in agreement. Also, for someone who claims not to be bothered one way or the other about the outcome of this move discussion, you sure seem quite upset about it. Spleodrach (talk) 16:47, 29 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
As stated playing Devil's Adovocate. Was quite appropriate too considering the way this discussion was done and handled with the holes in the arguments [on both sides] and casual disregarding of perfectly valid evidence out of hand as if it had no weight. Mabuska (talk) 19:47, 30 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
My !vote is perfectly valid. I agreed with Guliolopez and the arguments he made. So no need for me to type the same thing again. Spleodrach (talk) 12:13, 26 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

to Hell or Connaught

edit
Latest comment: 2 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Where are these words in the article? As said here: Lead by Cromwell, the English ruling class laid claim to the expansive and fertile farmland located in northern and eastern Ireland at the expense of the Irish peasantry. The newly displaced Irish peasantry were banished to western and southern Ireland. While ordering the mass eviction of Irish Catholics from their land, Cromwell famously announced that he would send the Irish “to Hell or Connaught!” 2A01:6F02:333:35F1:BCB4:61E0:5BAC:CA33 (talk) 01:07, 25 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Connacht&oldid=1247599772"