The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Troubles, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on this article (except in
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 sourcedmust 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.
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
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 is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belfast, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the City of Belfast, Northern Ireland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.BelfastWikipedia:WikiProject BelfastTemplate:WikiProject BelfastBelfast-related articles
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism 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.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism articles
Following the discussion here consensus is to change this article to remove mentions of the "Leader of Sinn Féin in the Northern Ireland Assembly" position. FDW777 (talk) 09:02, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Controversies?
Should the section on his family's history of abuse really be included under the "controversy" section? It feels really out of place. Controversy implies that he himself was criticized for his actions or views, as in the "n-word" fiasco. I would place it in a section on his family and background. I am not going to take any action myself, just a thought.--Óli Gneisti (talk) 11:09, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Context on Adams' denial of IRA membership
Hi
WP:MANDY). I'm not sure what the second half of your edit summary meant, so if you could expand on that that would be great. Ganesha811 (talk) 13:18, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
David A. Graham has no expertise in the subject area. What he's written is also inaccurate.
WP:BLPCRIME, we state the allegation, and that Adams denies it. We don't need to try and hammer home his alleged guilt by claiming his denial is "plainly ridiculous". FDW777 (talk) 13:58, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
FDW777, fair enough, and you make good points. I think it would be helpful to add some of this information to the section to make clear to readers why it is in Adams' interest to deny he was in the IRA despite widespread evidence of membership, as that is the obvious question that may come to mind when reading the article. Ganesha811 (talk) 16:31, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
While I understand the desire to add context to the denial, it's very problematic due to
WP:BLPCRIME. As a living person, Adams is innocent until proven guilty. So I really don't see how to add context to the denial in a "he says he wasn't in the IRA, but he was really" type way while still being compliant with BLPCRIME. FDW777 (talk) 07:22, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
FDW777, fair enough. But the question of whether Adams was in the IRA is not exactly obscure - it's been a widespread topic of discussion in reliable sources. I think the approach has to be to cover it using those sources - accurately conveying what reliable sources have said about his denial, while not using Wikipedia's voice to make accusations or analyze the situation directly. Focus on the statements of subject matter experts. It is tricky, though, and I understand your desire for caution. Ganesha811 (talk) 13:28, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The article does cover his alleged IRA membership, but I still don't see how to get involved in analysis of his denial without violating BLPCRIME. FDW777 (talk) 15:21, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding historic membership and prosecutions see for example Ivor Bell was was charged with historic IRA membership in 2014 (despite being expelleed from the IRA in the mid-1980s, see here). Similarly Kieran Conway would only travel to England to give evidence at an inquest if he was assured he wouldn't be prosecuted for past IRA membership. FDW777 (talk) 14:16, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Controversy
This article has a controversy section that contains information about one single tweet containing the n-word. I‘m not saying that isn’t relevant, but we’re talking about one of the most controversial figures in the 20th century here. The tweet seems a bit ridiculous compared to all of the controversy around his potential IRA membership, the condolence of violence etc. I realise that information is in the other sections but this seems a bit strange. I think either the IRA stuff should be also referenced in the Controversy section or that section should be renamed to something like recent controversies. 95.222.53.72 (talk) 18:44, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Low value sources
As I have pointed out, there is no need accusations from primary references to be included when we already cite much more reliable secondary references, who have listened to what people like Price, Hughes et al say and made their determination accordingly. This is a position backed up by the request for comment at Talk:Gerry Adams/Archive 3#Request for Comment:Alleged IRA Membership, in particular "I can see citing a couple instances as examples of evidence and leaving the rest as references, but a laundry list of purported evidence does not belong here" and "Yes, exactly. It's a notable allegation denied by the subject, we should present it in those terms, in the simplest way possible and using the two or three best sources, and leave it at that" (which were the only responses!). "Person x says so too" adds nothing of value to what the article already says. FDW777 (talk) 13:30, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
User:FDW777 they are different allegations by different people in a RS and so worthy of inclusion. You do seem very keen to remove allegations of Adams' IRA involvement: [1]. A discussion from 2007 doesn't necessarily represent current consensus. Mztourist (talk) 06:52, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, they are the same allegation. You might also want to look at the history of this article, and see exactly who it is that fleshed out the section here so it became more about Adams' alleged trajectory through the IRA and less of a "this person says he was in the IRA, and so does this person, and this person, and this person, and this person" to the point of tedium. FDW777 (talk) 15:26, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Come on, man. Readers should be able to see what actual IRA members say about Adams' involvement. Anything less is just whitewashing. Jessintime (talk) 17:16, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
See the request for comment regarding laundry lists of accusers/evidence. Think differently? Start a new request for comment. FDW777 (talk) 14:25, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed what can only be described as a "laundry list" of additonal accusers, which flew in the face of the "using the two or three best sources" reply during the request for comment. Also I have removed the following addition, pending discussuion.
Almost all academics and researchers agree Adams was in the IRA and on his history in the organisation. They concur that he joined the IRA in the 1960s, was OC of the 2nd battalion of the
Belfast Brigade from 1971-1972, became adjutant for the brigade in 1972, and had become OC of the brigade by 1973.[1][2] Many also believe that Adams went on to become a key figure in the IRA's senior leadership, and that he joined the IRA Army Council in 1977 and remained in it for a significant period.[1][2]
This is essentially redundant to the current content, since it makes no sense to list many academics and researchers, then hammer it home with "Almost all academics and researchers agree Adams was in the IRA and on his history in the organisation". If anything, I believe this should replace the current text not be used in addition to it. However without qutes from the sources cited I am unable to say if they cover the entirety of the existing text, so if quotes can be provided that would be helpful.
Per
WP:ONUS please do not restore this text, especially since it has been the subject of a request for comment. Kathleen's bike (talk) 14:27, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
.svg){kind=small}
.svg){kind=small}
