Talk:Billy McFarland (loyalist)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Billy McFarland (loyalist) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

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.

Biography: Military Start‑class

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
Start	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
	This article is supported by the military biography work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Northern Ireland

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Which area?

Was active in a series of bomb attacks on Catholic-owned businesses in the area. Which area did McFarland carry out these attacks?--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 06:21, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The area covered by the brigade - no specific locations are given in the source beyond that. I've edited the article to reflect this. Keresaspa (talk) 16:10, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That looks fine now.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:14, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rfc: Unsourced material repeatedly being added by a new editor and an anonymous IP

This Rfc was closed because the editor User:Burnside77, adding unsourced content to the biography of living person was found a sockpuppet of User:Burnside55 and is now blocked indefinitely as per WP:SOCK. It was agreed that the article should strictly be in accordance with Wikipedia biography of living person guideline. There is no activity on the page since block was made. If found, any similar WP:DUCK activity from a different Wikipedia account, it should go at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Burnside55. And, similar instances of vandalism/edit warring should be reported at Administrator intervention against vandalism noticeboard after level 4 warning or Administrators' noticeboard/edit warring. (non-admin closure) Anupmehra -Let's talk! 04:51, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion 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.

Summary

A number of recent additions have been made and reverted by me and another edit due to sourcing issues. I'm keen to avoid a two way edit war and so am looking for other editors input. Keresaspa (talk) 23:56, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've been notified of this RfC randomly by Legobot. But at the moment I'm not going to offer any opinion because it's not clear exactly what this dispute is about. @Keresaspa: could you please provide more information on what you think should or shouldn't be included in the article and why? Right now there is not enough information for me to offer any opinion. A more detailed description may also encourage other non-involved editors to offer their opinions here. -- Shudde ^talk 00:01, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A user came along and added a number of unsourced statements whilst removing sourced material, both anonymously and under the name User:Burnside55. Here's a comparison of the sourced version and after Burnside55's edits. When another user and then me reverted the edits they would promptly be restored as "the truth". I contacted Burnside55 to tell them about WP:V (given that the sources offered included "UDA volunteer Londonderry" and "UWC 1972") and other rules that were being broken but was given no response and the material was restored and the existing sourced material removed once again. I have since, as an assumption of good faith, added some of Burnside55's additions back in where they are at least claimed to be from newspapers and the article has now stabilised but I won't be at all surprised if the user, who as I have stated refuses to communicate, restores their version again.

I should add that I've never sued this process before and didn't particularly want to as it looks rather toothless but equally I didn't want to get bogged down in an edit war with a user who won't communicate and I know WP:ANI is often a waste of time if you haven't jumped through several hoops in advance so I went down this route as a starting point. Keresaspa (talk) 00:13, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I should also note this recent edit by Burnside55 where the user has decided to put my name in the article. I would like that edit redacted if possible. Keresaspa (talk) 00:18, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Obliviously any un-sourced material can be removed from a biographical article as per WP:BLP, and any contentious material should be removed immediately. But if this is done it's probably always a good idea to add a note on the talk-page here. Looking at [1] it doesn't look like much material has been added (and that which has been added is sourced). Looking at edits by Burnside55 here I'm guessing whoever they are supports McFarland and are opposed to his dismissal as a Brigade head in the Ulster Defence Association? If there is further edit warring or disruptive editing consider using an appropriate warning template as per WP:WARN before taking this to any noticeboards. -- Shudde ^talk 02:20, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Keresaspa: - I understand this is your first RfC so you have a pass, but next time please try to describe the exact problem clearly and concisely in your RfC. I haven't looked at this real deeply, but glancing over it User:Burnside55's behavior strikes me as obviously disruptive. I'd just continue reverting him and if it develops into an edit war, report him. Plus, are Burnside77 and 55 the same person. 55 was a sock puppet, so I'm guessing 77 is too. NickCT (talk) 18:57, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Considering it says in bold writing "a brief, neutral [my emphasis] statement of the issue" I felt I did "describe the exact problem clearly and concisely". Had I given any ore detail about the disruption being caused on this page by the Burnsides I would have been beaten with the "assume good faith" and "don't bite the newcomers" sticks. You can't win in this place. Keresaspa (talk) 19:22, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think you could have made it a little clear. But regardless, kudos for you for seeking advise from the community. That at least is always a good thing to do. I think you have an answer on what you should be doing in this situation. NickCT (talk) 21:03, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that I received a late invitation from Legobot to participate into here. User:Burnside77 has been blocked indefinitely as a suspected sockpuppet of User:Burnside55. The Rfc now should be closed. I'll admit that I had to read top to bottom to understand the situation due to lack of a simple, clear and complete summary of the dispute on top. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 04:00, 7 August 2014 (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.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Billy McFarland. 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: 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) 17:07, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Billy McFarland. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20150924065014/http://www.patfinucanecentre.org/archive/sattacks/feb03att.html to http://www.patfinucanecentre.org/archive/sattacks/feb03att.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) 08:30, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 3 February 2019

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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.

Moved as proposed. bd2412 T 13:08, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Billy McFarland → Billy McFarland (loyalist) – No clear primary topic for "Billy McFarland". If you consider pageviews from 01/07/2015 - 01/04/2017 (i.e. before the whole Fyre Festival thing kicked off) both men were getting an equivalent number of views. Even disregarding recent publicity for the entrepreneur/fraudster, it does not seem to be the case that most readers are looking for the loyalist paramilitary. PC78 (talk) 12:44, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

William McFarland In ictu oculi (talk) 20:38, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- @In ictu oculi: Not sure what to do with that comment, would you mind expanding on it a bit? PC78 (talk) 21:10, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

not sure what I think maybe the dab should be with the long form name William In ictu oculi (talk) 22:38, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support - yep. No primary anyway. In ictu oculi (talk) 22:40, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support no evidence that its the primary topic --DannyS712 (talk) 08:34, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nomination, In ictu oculi and DannyS712. Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 20:12, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per page views and we're a bit outside 2DABs since there is William McFarland (disambiguation) and "Billy" and "William" are sometimes used interchangeably. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:49, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. 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.