Talk:Foclut

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Ireland Low‑importance 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.

Every item in the current article is taken from the cited reference work, which was authored by a member of the Classics faculty at

I added the tag based upon a discussion on another talkpage. Until an expert reviews it, please do not remove tags from articles you have created.

I will now add back the tag. Morenooso 23:50, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Even if Wikipedia had agreed upon what constitutes an expert, which it famously hasn't, I don't know that we have any "experts" on Foclut in the community. As I mentioned on your talk page, I'll leave the tag for the moment, with the expectation that you're seeking the expert in question. But you're quoting a removal policy that doesn't exist, and I have no intention of leaving that tag indefinitely on a properly-formatted article that cites its lone source. Dppowell 00:03, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It derives from the message template for maintenance tags which has a basic reference to this Maintenance department. I have a question about the article's notability too. I will now add that tag too. Morenooso 00:07, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It derives from the message template for maintenance tags which has a basic reference to this Maintenance department.

I'm sorry, I have no idea what that sentence means. Would you rephrase? Your notability tag is also unwarranted, unless you're leading a campaign to place the same tag on every article that exists for minor characters in video games, television shows, and the endless other minutiae that crowd Wikipedia's database. If

The standardarized message templates use {{subst:uw-maintenance1}}. As an editor, I have a question about the notability. Not every mention of a fictional place deserves a separate article on Wikipedia. Morenooso 00:19, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uh, it's not a fictional place. It's where Saint Patrick was held captive in the 5th century. A published, third-party source is referenced. Tag removed. Dppowell 00:24, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article was originally a much longer and rather dubious one under another title, & not by Dppowell at all. I placed a notice on the St Patrick talk page asking that it be looked at "by someone who knows". This has now happened; the article is far shorter, properly written & has a good-quality reference. As far as I am concerned, attention from an expert is what it has had. I don't belive notability is an issue either. You comments are unneccessarily cryptic and rather odd - what makes you think the location is "fictional"? I will remove the tag. If you want to add it again you should explain clearly on the talk page what issues you believe the article has. Johnbod 02:02, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• "Patrick's 7th century biographer, Tírechán, writing two centuries after Patrick, indicates that Foclut was in County Mayo near the border with County Sligo, near the modern village of Killala." If Patrick's 7th century biographer, Tírechán, actually did mention Co. Mayo, Co. Sligo and the village of Killala, a quote might quell doubts. --Wetman 11:12, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. For what it's worth, I quoted the description of the location from Philip Freeman, a professor of classics at Washington University (St. Louis). The reference is at the top of page 25 of his 2004 book, "St. Patrick of Ireland: A Biography." He attributes it to Tírechán, and I did not presume to verify his research. Dppowell 14:21, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"I heard the voices of those Irish who live near the woods of Focluth near the Western Sea."

This very obviously references Strathclyde and is talking about Dalriada.

This may come as shock to some people, but most modern scholarship doesn't place the Irish as invaders of Scotland, but a mixture of people from both seashores for centuries pre-historically given that each seashore can be seen with the naked eye on a sunny day.

Patrick knew of Dalriada about the same time as the purported "invasion" that isn't really borne out by the archaelogical record. If anything at all it was a return of natives with a new tongue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.37.17.201 (talk) 15:31, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]