Talk:Irish Republican Army

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

Military history: British / European CL‑class This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles CL This article has been rated as CL-class on the project's quality scale. This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  British military history task force European military history task force Ireland Mid‑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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Organizations 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.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Warning: active arbitration remedies 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 outside opinions. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

I don't see how we can modify this flow chart. And knowing Wikipedia, someone would blow away the changes if I submitted them anyways. However, I'm assuming decomissionning (several entries) should read decomissioning. Additionally, I would highly recommend correcting the capitization. Some phrases are capitalized, some are not, sometimes it is Irish, sometimes it is irish. It has me strongly questioning the validity of the chart in general. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.77.168.19 (talk) 00:45, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

After making some changes to the This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects section above, I realized that I should ask for discussion about the changes here. Please discuss the changes above, and say whether is any problem or not.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 00:30, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article appears as a "Set index article." How and why is this a set index article? Maybe it should be something else.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 19:32, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In approx 2007, in a press release from the White House press room, the head of the department of defence officially admitted that the CIA had funded the IRA, but clarified that the CIA weren't funding terrorism and that the money given to the IRA by the CIA for decades was a bribe, that they bribed the IRA not to set bombs off in or nearby US businesses such as McDonalds, and not to set bombs off where US tourists and US businessmen frequent.

This info should be in the wikipage, just needs someone to source it. HardeeHar (talk) 13:38, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. So they were funding and abetting terrorism, thus they should self-arrest.

Zezen (talk) 18:18, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The IRA were not terrorists. Nepixjohn (talk) 00:58, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The changes made are not a neutral summary of the Provisional Irish Republican Army or Provisional Irish Republican Army campaign articles, are unreferenced, and on the critical point is contradicted by as reliable reference. IRA, The Bombs and the Bullets: A History of Deadly Ingenuity by A.R. Oppenheimer (ISBN 978-0716528951) states: Bombs, the IRA's chosen means of attack, have long been the most indiscriminate of weapons, whether used by terrorist groups or dropped from planes on cities. But on the whole the organisation avoided civilian casualties as far as possible within the frenetic mayhem of urban and rural insurgency warfare, a situation in which civilians will always get caught up in the conflict. This does not excuse the misery and injury it caused, as this strategy often went wrong, but may begin to explain it. The IRA did not target non-combatants, but there were civilian targets - individuals in or connected to the British government, royal family, judiciary and other establishment figures. Otherwise, chief targets were members or associates of the British forces and security services. FDW777 (talk) 09:55, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've recently created a

However, the reality is much more complex and is covered at Provisional Irish Republican Army#Splinter groups (which is properly referenced)

• Óglaigh na hÉireann (which split from Real) also included ex-Provos and ex-INLA
• Provisional IRA dissidents (2011–present) - joined with RAAD and Real to form New
• RAAD - included ex-Provos

I don't even know what variables I'd need to change to incorporate all those, and I think these details would be better off detailed in text alone. The number of lines involved going in different directions would be a nightmare anyway (although if someone can prove me wrong, please do so). FDW777 (talk) 17:36, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the timeline template (often seen for band members) would work here? I'll see if I can come up with something (will first publish here, not on the article). SQB (talk) 07:14, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Something like this? I've only included a few organisations and events, and I respect that the start and end dates may be disputed; it's just to see if it would work.SQB (talk) 09:36, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fianna Fáil are described as the second-largest party in Ireland and Fine Gael the third-largest in the Republic. As Finna Fáil doesn't organise in the North, this makes the text unbalanced and not neutral. I would propose "largest party in the Republic" for Fianna Fáil to restore parity. I'm also going to dispute the neutrality of the article until this matter is resolved. Regards, Billsmith60 (talk) 14:41, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2020 election in the South: FF 38 seats, SF 37, FG 35. Billsmith60 (talk) 15:03, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]