Talk:Bulmer Hobson

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Bulmer Hobson 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

Biography: Military / Politics and Government

	Biography portal 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 supported by the military biography work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

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

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

Irish republicanism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Irish republicanism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Irish republicanism and Irish nationalism related topics 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.Irish republicanismWikipedia:WikiProject Irish republicanismTemplate:WikiProject Irish republicanismIrish republicanism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 11:02, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citations

The citation needed tags are getting a bit excessive, especially when they appear more than once in a single sentence. And Domer, I fail to see how you can say that the Rising stood little chance of military success needs to be cited when you've spent much of the past few months arguing that military success was not a goal, consideration, or even a possibility. That tag, at least, is unnecessary. I'll remove it. -R. fiend (talk) 17:11, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please read our policy on WP:V, "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. "Verifiable" in this context means that readers should be able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source. Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed." Pleas do not remove {citation} tags, as they indicate that this information needs to be referenced. This is one of our key policies, and should not be viewed as a guidline. Thank you, --Domer48 (talk) 18:25, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus H. Christ. We do not need citation needed tags on every single sentence. Something which is common knowledge and backed up by any source on the topic does not need to be cited. That the rising stood little chance of military success is one such fact. No one in the world has ever argued otherwise. You yourself said it was impossible several times. Why is there a tag for that but not for the fact that he was born in County Tyrone, for example? I admit there are certainly statements in the text that should have footnotes, but that is not one of them. -R. fiend (talk) 18:41, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged should be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation.^[1] The source should be cited clearly and precisely to enable readers to find the text that supports the article content in question. This is official policy on the English Wikipedia. It is a widely accepted standard that all users should follow. --Domer48 (talk) 18:50, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But no one is likely to challenge that the rising stood little chance of military success. -R. fiend (talk) 18:54, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's not what the article says. The article says Hobson believed that, so it's hardly unreasonable for a source to be provided stating that is the case. Or are we just going to attribute beliefs to people without sources now? One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 18:59, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ When content in Wikipedia requires direct substantiation, the established convention is to provide an inline citation to the supporting references. The rationale is that this provides the most direct means to verify whether the content is consistent with the references. Alternative conventions exist, and are acceptable when they provide clear and precise attribution for the article's assertions, but inline citations are considered "best practice" under this rationale. For more details, please consult Wikipedia:Citing_sources#How_to_cite_sources.

Dungannon Clubs

Could this sentence be phrased better: "The suggested object of these clubs was to celebrate the constitutionalist Volunteers of 1782, though they were also an armed militia whose success could offer instructive lessons"? First of all, I've never seen anything describing the Dungannon Clubs as militia-like. The sources I've read describe them as clubs for discussion of national politics (obviously with Republican leanings), campaigning against recruitment into the British Army, producing pro-independence publications, and recruiting into the IRB. Where did they get guns to arm their members? I guess if there's a source it's okay, but it's curious that such a significant factor is ignored by other sources. Anyway, my main concern is the "whose success could offer instructive lessons" part. Success in what? Lessons in what and for whom? What success did they have that provided lessons for people? Very vague and sloppy. Can it be clarified? -R. fiend (talk) 17:13, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Expanding the Article

Almost all the unreferenced information has been removed. I will expand now on the article to include many of the activities in which Hobson was to play a leading role. It would help if we insist that all furture additions to the article are referenced. --Domer48 (talk) 18:59, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hobson's place of birth

O Fenian - If 'dozens' of writers say he was born in Holywood quote me those or even one that claims they know Holywood to be true as opposed to their copying from others.

The only full scale biography by Marnie Hay (2009) says Belfast and gives the birth address as 5 Magdala Street.

Why do you remove referenced material when you insist on it at every stage? 81.158.228.91 (talk) 11:07, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What does Hay have to say on any Holywood connection? I just wonder how the misunderstanding arose in the first place. RashersTierney (talk) 11:22, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've added four ref's, I can add more if needed. Working late this week but will add more Saturday if I get the chance. --Domer48_'fenian' 14:56, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hay ref's his sister Mary in her Memoirs as the source. [1] (link made for reference purposes only). If he was born in Holywood, at what address, and who says? I too have always accepted the received wisdom of Holywood as his birth place but it must now be questioned. RashersTierney (talk) 15:30, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

J Anthony Gaughan also gives Belfast as his place of birth. [2] RashersTierney (talk) 16:18, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Many others agree with Holywood. Is there any evidence for the claim they have all copied from each other? O Fenian (talk) 21:11, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No need. If I had been asked last week I would also have given Holywood as his birth place, without hesitation, (or evidence). Hay's research (grounded in Mary Hobson's testimony) changes that. Is there evidence of a specific address in Holywood that also claims him? RashersTierney (talk) 21:31, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rashers - Hobson's parental family lived in Marino outside Holywood around 1910 which is where the error may originate. As Marnie Hay gives an actual address in Belfast and nobody provides one in Holywood I believe she must predominate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.158.228.91 (talk) 21:06, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do we have consensus for Belfast as his place of birth? RashersTierney (talk) 22:30, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How many more ref's will I need to put up? I put up four? --Domer48_'fenian' 19:40, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hay gives as her source Hobsons sister, which short of his Birth Cert. is as close to a primary source as you can get. Where in Holywood was he born? RashersTierney (talk) 19:43, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Domer, if you believe that Dr. Hay is incorrect in stating that Bulmer Hobson was born at No. 5 Magdala Street, please give your reasons. Don't rehash other peoples best guesses at the time they were writing general histories. Hobson was not born in Holywood, get over it! RashersTierney (talk) 00:33, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Most historians (and others, such as law enforcement personnel) will tell you that a person's memory is inherently unreliable, especially some memoirs published 64 years after Hobson's birth. A person's place of birth or residence can easily be verified by other means such as birth certificates or census records, all of which are far more reliable than a person's blurred memory. O Fenian (talk) 08:49, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a couple more references. I hope that helps. RashersTierney if it was not for your tone and attitude which is a bit uncivil, I'd be more than willing to help find supporting references for you. --Domer48_'fenian' 09:04, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry if you think my attitude has personalised this issue but it is you who has refused to engage with the points raised. You seem to think that the requirement of consensus means you have a veto on changes you don't like, for whatever reason. Please stop adding unnecessary and irrelevant references and address the central question., which is that Holywood was not the place of birth as evidenced from recent published scholarly research. I would be delighted if you were to find a BC that showed otherwise and we could revert to Co. Down, but are you seriously saying that Hay got it wrong, and your opinion of Hay's source should be given more weight than hers. RashersTierney (talk) 10:23, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please, now lets not be silly. What points have you raised? That Hay is right and every other historian is wrong? Lets look at one of the unnecessary and irrelevant references I added it's titled Culture, Place and Identity: Papers Read Before the 26th Irish Conference of Historians Held at the University of Ulster, Magee Campus, 22-25 May 2003, Neal Garnham, Keith Jeffery, University College Dublin Press, 2005, ISBN 1904558348 pg.5, and not one of them picked up on recent published scholarly research, which is that Holywood was not the place of birth? Now please show me were I seem to think that the requirement of consensus means I have a veto on changes I don't like? That's right I never did, now read WP:V. --Domer48_'fenian' 10:49, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The difference between Hay and other scholars is that she directly questions the received wisdom, finds it to be false and gives a primary source for that conclusion. Rather than refer me to WP:V, which I read carefully again before raising this issue here, especially as it relates to 'hierarchy of sources', you might spend some time on it yourself. Your loading of the article with unnecessary refs (no-one denies that for years Holywood has been accepted as his birth place by most historians) is simply disruptive. RashersTierney (talk) 11:05, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeh, now please get a secondary source to back it up. Your removal of them sources leaves me no alternative but to replace them, and add more. Now stop being disruptive, I tried to be nice but but all you have left to offer is attitude. --Domer48_'fenian' 12:08, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~You tried to be nice? How patronising of you.~~withdrawn per WP:NPA, but please try to confine comments to the contested issue. RashersTierney (talk) 12:38, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Primary source #2. Census return, 1911 giving Bulmer Hobson's place of birth as Belfast. RashersTierney (talk) 18:02, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Folks, according to official state birth records, John Bulmer Hobson was born on 14 January 1883 at 5 Magdala Street, in the registrar's district Belfast No 6, in Belfast.[3] Case closed.--Damac (talk) 14:56, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[1] When content in Wikipedia requires direct substantiation, the established convention is to provide an inline citation to the supporting references. The rationale is that this provides the most direct means to verify whether the content is consistent with the references. Alternative conventions exist, and are acceptable when they provide clear and precise attribution for the article's assertions, but inline citations are considered "best practice" under this rationale. For more details, please consult Wikipedia:Citing_sources#How_to_cite_sources.

[1]