Talk:Portadown

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Portadown 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

Cities C‑class

	Cities portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities
C	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.

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

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

Untitled

If your readers wish to expand their knowledge of portadown in pictorial form they could do no better than click on this web-site:

http://www.portadownphotos.freehomepage.com/index.htm

Mary Peters

Why is Mary Peters mentioned here? In her Wiki page it states she's from Liverpool and later moved to another town in Northern Ireland. May list the Portadown connection?

To answer your question:

Although Mary Peters was not from Portadown she was a pupil at Portadown College. You will see her listed in the alumni section of the school's web site. I'm a past pupil of that school myself and remember her photograph on display in the main foyer of the school.

People

For a person to be listed, they must be notable (see WP:Notable). Normally that means that there is an article about them. I have commented ouit those who have red links. If citations or articles can be provided they can be made visible again. --Red King (talk) 19:46, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm - I hate to say it but there are many, many, many thousands of notable people who don't have wikipedia articles on them. I don't think that's a very good guide to be honest.The Thunderer (talk) 11:12, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling corrections

It's wonderful to go back when someone has editied your own copy and see how pathetic your own spelling has become. *sigh*. Not only that but the use of a "Grocer's Apostrophe" - I am so ashamed. Thank you Rjwilmsi. The Thunderer (talk) 11:12, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Ulster Transport Authority.gif

The image Image:Ulster Transport Authority.gif is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --01:08, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Thunderer (talk) 11:25, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article drive

Lurgan has now been awarded Good Article status. Myself and a few others now plan to get this article up to the same standard. If you want to help out, please see WP:UKCITIES for the relevant guidelines. There's a fair bit of information already on this page, I think most of the work will involve reformatting what is here, particularly the citations. See the formatting of citations at the Lurgan page to see how it's done. --Eamonnca1 (talk) 18:34, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't doubt the notability of McConville's Pub but we could use a citation for it. The link that was there before has gone dead. Anyone...? --Eamonnca1 (talk) 22:34, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think we're just about there. Will we go ahead and nominate it for GA or do a few more days of editing first? --Eamonnca1 (talk) 20:26, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article is definitely much better than it was a few days ago... but I think it's too soon to nominate. There's a few things I plan to add and a few things I plan to change. I don't think it has enough sources yet either.

~Asarlaí 20:54, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It has almost as many sources as the Lurgan page, but my main problem is that a lot of them are not third party sources and the formatting is not consistent. I was going to change the formatting but I think a lot of these sources are gonna have to be replaced anyway so I held off. Maybe there'd be some merit in moving them to an External Links section? --Eamonnca1 (talk) 21:04, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Street nicknames

I could see this section being a problem when it comes to GA review. Is it possible to get citations for this? --Eamonnca1 (talk) 20:58, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Long running" dispute

Since trouble surrounding parades has been going on since the day the orange order was born, and that the latest episode in it has not been resolved since it blew up in the 1990s, the statement that the Drumcree conflict is a "long running" dispute is entirely appropriate. --Eamonnca1 (talk) 21:40, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There was no dispute at Drumcree that I recall before the 1990s. You'll need to find a source to back up the claim. Mooretwin (talk) 21:42, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Drumcree conflict. There has been violence directly related to Orange parades in the area since the Orange Order was formed, and violence directly related to the Drumcree parade since the early 19th century. The main article only mentions this early violence briefly, so you may want to have a read through this for the nitty-gritty. ~Asarlaí 22:26, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback. Citation added. --Eamonnca1 (talk) 23:33, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So long as there's a source. Mooretwin (talk) 07:18, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, there's no page number with the citation - could somebody post what precisely the source says so that we can determine whether it supports the statement that the Drumcree conflict is a long-running dispute over parading that began in the early 1800s? Even the Drumcree conflict article, which is biased in favour of the nationalist perspective, doesn't seem to support the claim. It doesn't mention any dispute, but only "violence" "during" the parade in various years between 1873 and 1917. The first mention that the parade was disputed is 1986 (and then the dispute appeared to relate to Obins Street), with the actual "Drumcree conflict" referred to in this article, beginning in 1995. Mooretwin (talk) 07:34, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback, page numbers added. If you really want the readers of the article to be in no doubt, I could actually embed the following quote from Lord Gosford in 1795:

"Resolved, that it appears to this meeting, that the County of Armagh is at this moment in a state of uncommon disorder, that the Roman Catholic inhabitants are grievously oppressed by lawless persons unknown, who attack and plunder their houses by night and threaten them with instant destruction, unless they abandon immediately their lands and habitations"

"It is no secret, that a persecution, accompanied with all the circumstances of ferocious cruelty, which have in all ages distinguished that calamity is now raging in this County. Neither age nor sex, nor even acknowledged innocence, as to any guilt in the late disturbances, is sufficient to excite mercy or afford protection. The only crime, which the wretched objects of this ruthless persecution are charged with, is a crime indeed of easy proof: It is simply a profession of the Roman Catholic faith, or an intimate connection with a person professing that faith. A lawless banditry have constituted themselves judges of this new species of delinquency, and the sentence they have denounced is equally concise and terrible! It is nothing less than a confiscation of all property, and an immediate banishment."

Would you like me to include this quote? (Psst! Lord Gosford was not a Shinner.) --Eamonnca1 (talk) 17:55, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The research paper referred to be Asarlaí does not contain the actual dates of the newspapers that I gathered information from. However, I can and will supply those dates - when I get time to rewrite 'Two Hundred Years in the Citadel'. Meantime, if anyone can access British parliamentary papers they will find ample evidence of the Drumcree dispute back as far as the 1830's and in 1905 - when the MP for West Belfast MP for Joe Devlin pointed out that Orangemen could take an alternative rout to Drumcree Church and called on the government to prohibit Orange marches through 'the Catholic quarter' - meaing Obins Street. Obins Street was the main Nationalist/Catholic district - on the edge of Portadown and literally 'on the other side of the tracks' - separated from the town by the Belfast-Dublin and the Portadown-Dungannon railway lines. Thought there were always two alternative routes to Drumcree, the Orange insisted on passing through Obins Street - that's what the 'dispute' was about (Imagine Neo-facists marching through Bronx or Brixton etc). It was never about the Orange marching to or assembling at Drumcree Church. And the dispute took many forms - from petitions to local Majistrates in the early 1800s and police intervention (1807), petitions to Parliament, riots, fist-fights, taunting, locals deliberately crossing the road during Orange marces etc. The events detailed in my blog article only skim the surface. The local newspapers were Orange supporters - so Nationalists had no 'verifiable' records - only folklore and a few songs. So to say there is no record of a 'long running dispute' is not correct. It may not have been called a 'dsipute', but that doesnt mean it wasn't one.Maolcholann (talk) 09:53, 22 April 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.107.215.63 (talk) 09:48, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The records to which you refer would indicate that there has been a dispute over Obins Street since the early 19th century. The text, however, refers to "the Drumcree conflict" a long-running dispute. The Drumcree confict, which erupted in the 1990s, is over the Garvaghy Road, not Obins Street. Mooretwin (talk) 12:33, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And it's now 2010, hence a long running dispute. --Eamonnca1 (talk) 17:42, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The text implies that there has been a conflict over the Drumcree parade since the early nineteenth century, not since 1995. I've no issue with "long-running" if the reference to the early 1800s goes. Mooretwin (talk) 22:49, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've modified the text to say that it's the 'latest part' of a long running dispute.... --Eamonnca1 (talk) 23:33, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's better. Mooretwin (talk) 23:36, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Portadoun"

Are you serious? --Eamonnca1 (talk) 17:36, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not a single mention of sectarianism

I've rechecked and this article is headlined Portadown. More than any place in western Europe this town is synonymous with sectarianism. To omit any references to it is more a case of not mentioning the elephant in the room. Also, when little villages across NI can tell us the religious breakdown, are we seriously meant to believe that there is no breakdown for religious or voting patterns in this town of 22,000 people? I'm all for the local leaders trying to move away from Portadown's extraordinarily ugly past, but this article strikes me as being more a case of keeping one's head in the sand. 109.78.241.27 (talk) 14:54, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is mentioned. Portadown#The_Troubles --Eamonnca1 ^TALK 20:58, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Portadown. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080314195645/http://www.lisburn.com:80/books/dromore-diocese/parish-seagoe.html to http://www.lisburn.com/books/dromore-diocese/parish-seagoe.html/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:04, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Portadown. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Attempted to fix sourcing for http://geocities.com/craigavonhs/rev/luttonriseofportadown.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071223030027/http://www.cshs.org.uk:80/default.asp to http://www.cshs.org.uk/default.asp/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:05, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Portadown. 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://geocities.com/craigavonhs/rev/frielrailwayscraig.html

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:18, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Portadown. 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) 05:04, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]