User talk:Eblana22

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Finnegans Wake, you may be blocked from editing. You have now (re-)inserted copy written entirely to promote what is obviously your own self-published book at least four times. Please see WP:SELFPUB and WP:SELFCITE. If you do not stop or provide a strong rationale on the talk page, I will request protections be placed on the article. Patrick (talk) 13:20, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just who are you, Mr Welsh? No one has heard of you in the Joyce mainstream canon!! My work is groundbreaking and fully endorsed from the most important source of all - the primary source of Finnegans Wake itself. Since when did secondary sources trump primary sources? Showing your stupidity and repeatedly so. Fact. Who are you? I can find no credentials to justify your bullying attitude here and all mainstream Joyceans have accepted my findings. What are you banging on about and who is inviting you to do so? Primary and secondary sources? What do you mean? Joyce DELIBERATELY filleted his notebooks to French's material a point I make far more vehemently in my revised edition out in a month from now. So if you are talking about Buffalo notebooks etc it won't be there since he was meticulous in his determination to cover his tracks.

There is a sleeping giant in the Dublin landscape - Finn-Finnegan. All Joyceans accept that. I found he died in Liverpool and that he is Percy French, who died and is buried in Liverpool and I decoded his first wife's name in the word "Bussoftlhee" in the last three lines of literature that Joyce ever penned. The poor scholars couldn't work Ethel from "tlhee" in eight decades. I shudder to think how they'd fare in a game of scrabble. As to how you'd fare in a game of basic logic never mind scrabble no one could possibly anticipate from your madness here. Have YOU read my book? Since the first book, I have found reams upon reams more of French's material all over FW including his fall in The Jarvey on the first page of the Wake. And what did you find? Who are you anyway? What did you ever publish? Have you ever published anything -self or otherwise except act the alpha male bullying pig on Wikipedia? You have absolutely no right to bully anyone on Wikipedia and I will take this up with the Wikipedia administrators and possibly the Irish Gardai as repeated harassment. Who is Patrick Welsh? Perhaps you should look up the definition of "gobshite". Is someone putting you up to this? Seems likely. Finnegan (singular) is French so suck it up you utter idiot. Are you even Irish and what do you know about Percy French and or Irish history in the fraught Parnell collapse from which the true story of the Wake originates? Do you know Percy French was robbed in a distillery in which he was induced to invest from 1876 and that it was a large Dublin distillery which went bust? The only large Dublin distillery which went bust in the period was the distillery managed by Joyce's father.

Are you familiar with the quiz chapter - chapter six of FW?? The distillery is in there and it is revealed there and can be proved elsewhere anyway from other reliable sources. The rest simply falls like dominoes. Carmen Eblana Press is fully incorporated with three directors.They will be in touch if you continue your tiresome bullying and your pathetic attempts to make a name for yourself. Now go away before I take this up in a serious manner including criminally. Read my book or shut up. Eblana22 (talk) 22:45, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ms Lowry, Wikipedia needs editors with expert knowledge like yours.

Please, however, consider taking the time to review the five basic pillars of Wikipedia. They should provide the necessary context that explains why I object to you citing your self-published book in what looks like self-promotion. Patrick (talk) 23:36, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would simply like to know what your credentials are as a Joyce- Wake aficionado and what you have published? Have you evenread my book? I suggest you wait for the next one, out in a few weeks which utterly locks it in. I confine my book to the Dublin story in FW. It runs right through it. It is too much for one book actually but I do my best. All I argue is that it had a very intense Dublin story with real life people and it revolves around Parnell- I argue that it is the central umbilicus of the Wake and that all the cosmic stuff, which I do not deny is there in abundance, is secondary to that story. Why don't you rearrange my findings instead of insulting me and making outlandish claims.My discoveries are THE most important discoveries since the Wake was published and I am confident I will be vindicated in that after the second version. Eblana22 (talk) 08:01, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be demonstrating a clear misunderstanding of how Wikipedia works, so let me break this down for you:

First, no personal attacks, ever. You directed some at Patrick above - don't do that again. WP:NPA.
Actually yes we do prioritise independent sources over primary sources. See WP:PRIMARY and WP:INDY
Whether Patrick, or any other editor, has published anything is irrelevant. That's not how we operate. We don't bring our own analysis here; that's WP:OR
Patrick is not bullying you.
One does not need to be Irish to edit on Irish topics.
The final few sentences of your original post above are very threatening, and even mention criminality, so let me state outright that Wikipedia has a no legal threats policy. I suggest you don't repeat such things otherwise it'll be an instant block.
To the main point, self published works are not considered reliable. Please see WP:SELFPUB and WP:RS. Consequently your own published works and analysis is not reliable enough for inclusion on Wikipedia.

— Czello ^(music) 14:42, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you want your work to be peer-reviewed, you need to submit it to a publication that makes use of peer-review. If you want your work to be published on Wikipedia, you need to make an effort to adhere to its policies and guidelines, the most basic of which currently at issue are WP:VERIFIABILITY and WP:RELIABLESOURCES.

The usual procedure on Wikipedia is WP:BRD: Boldly edit and, if Reverted, Discuss on the article talk page. Persistently restoring contested material is considered WP:EDITWARRING.

Finally, I have not deliberately insulted you, and I apologize if I have done so inadvertently. Would you in turn do me the courtesy of refraining from personal attacks?

Thanks, Patrick (talk) 14:45, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

August 2024

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ⇌ Jake Wartenberg 14:42, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]