Talk:Frank Fahey (politician)

Unsourced statements

I just deleted a bunch of statements for which I could find no support in the source cited near the bottom of the section. In addition, I am really uneasy about the remaining statements in the Investments, Property and the Russian Mafia section. The policy at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons is quite clear. "Unsourced or poorly sourced material — whether negative, positive, or just questionable — about living persons should be removed immediately and without discussion from Wikipedia articles, talk pages, user pages, and project space." The policy also says, "The burden of evidence for any edit on Wikipedia, but especially for edits about living persons, rests firmly on the shoulders of the person who adds or restores the material." The sources for the material that is still in that section look like rumor-mongering and quilt-by-association to me, but I am not familiar with the sources, and will leave judgment of how reliable they are to others. -- Donald Albury 15:26, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

WP:BLP violations

I have removed the following material, once again, from the article, because it violates the letter and the spirit of Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, or in the third sentence, our policy on copyrights..

Fahey was known for his advocacy of the project, dismissing An Bord Pleanala's refusal of planning permission as "just a hitch". This comment attracted criticism for its subversion of the supposedly independent planning body. As the minister also responsible for Coillte, the Irish national forestry service, he oversaw the sale to Shell Oil, for an undisclosed sum, of 400 acres of land at Bellanaboy in north County Mayo for a terminal where the unprocessed gas will be cleaned before entering the Bord Gáis network.

The first sentence, "Fahey was known for his advocacy of the project, dismissing An Bord Pleanala's refusal of planning permission as 'just a hitch'", is not supported by the cited link [1], which does not say anything about Fahey's advocacy for the Corrib project, and does not mention the "just a hitch" quote. The second sentence, "This comment attracted criticism for its subversion of the supposedly independent planning body", is not supported by the cited link [2], which is instead about the 'Rossport five'. Moreover, this site is a blog or forum, and is therefore not a reliable source.

The third sentence, "As the minister also responsible for Coillte, the Irish national forestry service, he oversaw the sale to Shell Oil, for an undisclosed sum, of 400 acres of land at Bellanaboy in north County Mayo for a terminal where the unprocessed gas will be cleaned before entering the Bord Gáis network", is copied verbatim from the cited link at [3]. While short quotes of copyrighted material may be used under the concept of "fair use", they must be clearly shown to be quotes. Please see Wikipedia:Copyrights.

A recent edit summary included the comment, "I assume editor [meaning me, I gather] is not all familiar with Corrib gas project." That is correct, I am not familiar with it, and therefore do not know why it is controversial. Per Wikipedia:Verifiability#Burden of evidence, it is the responsibility of the editor adding material to an article, or wanting to retain material in an article, to cite reliable sources supporting the material. The requirement is particularly important in articles about living persons. To quote from Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, "We must get the article right. Be very firm about the use of high quality references. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material — whether negative, positive, or just questionable — about living persons should be removed immediately and without discussion from Wikipedia articles, talk pages, user pages, and project space." If you want to call the Corrib project controversial, cite reliable sources that say it is controversial. The same goes for the rest of it. You cannot use sources that only refer obliquely to the material in the article. You must provide reliable sources for each statement, claim or opinion in the article. -- Donald Albury 13:48, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

References

Controversy

From wiktionary: controversial - arousing controversy, controversy - a debate, discussion of opposing opinions; strife.

1. Attempts to interfere in the independent planning process by Frank Fahey making public statements on the benefits the Corrib gas project would bring, before An Bord Pleanala had made its final decision.

2. The sale of 400 acres of state lands to a private company Shell Oil, in order to facilitate the building of an onshore processing plant, without this land Shell would have had to process off shore as is industry practice but more costly for them.

3. The compulsory purchase of land for the pipeline coming ashore to the processing plant, the first time in Irish history land was compulsory purchased for a private company. CPOs were only ever used to acquire land for roads, schools, hospitals etc., never had it being used to take private land and give it to a (foreign) private company.

4. The jailing of five innocent men, the Rossport Five who went to jail for 94 days after being held in contempt of court for breaking a High Court injunction which put them under a legal obligation to allow Shell workers on their own lands. Fahey sighed the CPO which gave their part of their farming lands to Shell Oil.

5. Constant protests and demonstrations (locally and nationally) by people opposed to the project, Shell to Sea, [4].

6. A High Court case in April 2007, which ruled that Shell cannot use the pipeline route they want, plus other court actions.

7. Independent safety review commissioned by the then Minister Noel Dempsey, in order to persuade locals that there were no safety concerns or risk to public health.

8. Impartial observers note: "Bitter dispute over gas pipeline" - BBC, [5]

If anyone feels this does not meet the definition of the word "Controversy", feel free to edit wiktionary so it reflects your own meaning of the word. Snappy56 17:27, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:No original research#Synthesis of published material serving to advance a position. You have to directly cite sources that establish that there is controversy, without resorting to synthesis. The article also must comply with Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Be sure that you cite reliable sources that support every point that you want to make. Now, I do not know Mr. Fahey, and I am not acquainted with the details of Irish politics, but I do strongly support the requirements of Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Wikipedia is not the place for political infighting. -- Donald Albury 17:58, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Do you ever tire of lecturing others?, probably not... Anyway, you seem to be implying a number of scurrilous charges at me. First, let's return to the definition of controversy:

- a debate, discussion of opposing opinions; strife.

Has there been debate in Ireland on this issue? Yes, reams of it.

Has there been discussion of opposing opinions? On boy, has there!

Has there been strife? Yes, protests, demos, police beating people off the road, lots of strife.

So there is definitely controversy. Next, original research, I haven't done any, wouldn't know where to start, wouldn't be bothered trying. Nor have I resorted to synthesis, if you can find an example of that in *any* article I have edited then please point it out to me. POV - snide accusation here too, in fact I am scrupulously NPOV, as a check of my edit history will show. In fact I put in the quote from Fahey in which he states, that certain allegations about him are part of a campaign against him. Hardly the thing a POV editor would so now, is it?

I see you've admitted you ignorance on Fahey, Corrib gas project and Irish politics, will you stop pontificating on these subjects too?

"Wikipedia is not the place for political infighting", I totally agree, I do not support any political party or agenda and generally treat all politicians with equal disdain. You seem to be confusing the insertion of facts about Fahey which show his dodgy dealings with an agenda. Just because the facts don't show him in a flattering light, doesn't mean I have an agenda to discredit him. I am simply pointing out the facts, that don't paint a pretty picture is simply the result. The article is meant to be fair neither a hatchet job or a hagiography. Snappy56 21:06, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Snappy56, I come here in response to a complaint filed at WP:BLP/N. I reading the article and your edits, I cannot but concur with Donald Albury on his assessment of these. Persisting in re-adding poorly sourced material or material that violates WP:NOR are considered disruptive editing and can result in the withdrawal of your editing privileges as per WP:BLOCK. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 18:48, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Firstly, I repeat, there is NO original research on my part. Please point where you think this is in the article. Secondly, the material is not 'poorly' sourced as has been described, on the contrary, it's very well sourced. Sources are from:
- The Irish Times  : Paper of record in Ireland (2nd largest selling broadsheet)
- Irish Independent: Largest selling broadsheet in Ireland
- Irish Examiner  : Third largest selling broadsheet in Ireland
- RTÉ News  : Irish state broadcaster
- BBC News  : British state broadcaster
- Western People  : Local newspaper in Mayo
- Sunday Tribune  : Sunday quality broadsheet
- Village magazine : Irish Political affairs magazine

There are also sources from the Green Party and Fine Gael, government and opposition political parties respectively. The only source which could be objected is indymedia.ie, which was described as a blog, though it isn't. In any case I have removed the indymedia citation. So, the remaining citations are NOT poorly sourced but VERY reputable indeed.

As I have stated before, I have no agenda regarding Frank Fahey, I merely record the facts and if the facts don't paint a rosy picture then that's Fahey's problem. When a senior government minister orders the sale of state lands to a private company, this is notable. It was not illegal but it was unusual, and I inserted this fact, with citation, and without any POV or editorialising in the article. The user dalbury then removed this sentence along with it's citation on the dubious grounds that it was a quote and breached copyright. In fact, it was 1 short sentence from a lengthy article which was cited, but rather than putting cquote in himself, he removed the whole thing. Do I smell an agenda here?

“ Assert facts, including facts about opinions—but do not assert the opinions themselves. By "fact" we mean "a piece of information about which there is no serious dispute." ”

- WP:NPOV

It would appear user dalbury is in breach of WP:NPOV, as he has confused facts with opinions. Wikipedia is supposed to be fair AND balanced, let's remember that! Snappy56 21:55, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

I believe you're on the ball, Snap. Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 13:08, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

BLP complaint

Just to notify that I'm going to do some editing to the article following this discussion: WP:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Frank_Fahey --FormerIP (talk) 22:13, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

And I may follow with sharp pruning shears as well. <g> Collect (talk) 22:40, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Share

Note sure where I got 2/3 from :P sorry. Reading the article is says they "shared about 75 per cent of the quotas given out, worth about €2 million." As I read it that means they received around €2 million, not the overall scheme totalling €2 million. I tweaked the article to say that - but if I am wrong then feel free to rv :) --Errant ^(chat!) 23:04, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Errant, grammatically, maybe the phrase you quote says that the quotas were worth €2 million, not the amount shared. The word "worth" perhaps most naturally attaches to the noun closest to it. Would it maybe be worth looking at multiple sources to see if they agree? --FormerIP (talk) 02:47, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

I've looked; but that's the only one I've found so far that actually treats this material (I've found a few other sources; but they deal exclusively with the Ombudsman and don't mention the constituents - except with a nod & wink). --Errant ^(chat!) 09:41, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Frank Fahey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110228221642/http://www.rte.ie/news/election2011/results/galway-west.html to http://www.rte.ie/news/election2011/results/galway-west.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:23, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Frank Fahey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929150529/http://archives.tcm.ie/irishexaminer/2006/06/29/story7126.asp to http://archives.tcm.ie/irishexaminer/2006/06/29/story7126.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:28, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Frank Fahey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100606054835/http://www.tribune.ie/article/2006/jun/18/moscow-allegation-places-controversy-laiden-frank-/?q=Frank%20Fahey%20moscow to http://www.tribune.ie/article/2006/jun/18/moscow-allegation-places-controversy-laiden-frank-/?q=Frank%20Fahey%20moscow

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:38, 14 December 2017 (UTC)