Talk:Michael McDowell (politician)

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 sourced must 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.

This page is about a politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. For that reason, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: 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 politics and government work group (assessed as Mid-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.

Source for the mention of his son Hugh, and about a moped?

three sons, John, Ross & Hugh, the latter having being involved in several yob attacks in McDowells constituency, Dublin South East. On occassion, a blue/yellow moped has been seen on the premises of McDowells residance for an extended period of time.

Any chance of a source being cited for the above? And what's the relevance of the moped report?

Kfor 20:17, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dail Privilege

I think the fact that McDowell used his dail privilege to avoid a libel lawsuit from frank connolly may be worth a mention

On that now. I can't believe that an ex-lawyer would do that deliberately. Well, I can, but still. Shoulda cost him his job. Supersheep 14:44, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Grandson to Eoin MacNeill

I think McDowell is Eoin Mac Néill's grandson (great grandson?), and he most definitely used this connection in order to establish his nationalist credentials when writing to Chuck Feeney in recent months (The Irish Times). Does anybody know the exact connection? (unsigned comment on 22:40, 22 December 2005 by 193.1.172.138

He is is grandson - see biography on party website--File Éireann 23:26, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Name Pronunciation

McDowell is not pronounced "McDool". The Irish version of his name would be, but he never uses it. McDowell is pronounced McDowl, as in Andie McDowell.

I don't think there is any one definitive pronunciation of the name, it is variously McDool, McDoo-ill, McDowl, McDow-ell and in the North you will find people calling themselves M'Dole. Which one Michael McDowell uses I can never remember, but if I'm not mistaken he uses a different version to his brother, Moore McDowell.

I'm taking out the pronunciation, in that case 194.97.161.178 14:43, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty sure it's pronounced McDool in this guy's case, will pay attention on the news next time. Supersheep 14:44, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He was asked in an interview on an Irish talkshow and he said that personally he doesn't mind how it's pronounced so the reference to pronunciation really has no place --Stevecull 13:29, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone pronounces it "McDool" in his case - including fellow senior party-members. In the South, McDowell is either pronounced McDowall or McDool. (Ronan) 22:45 - 26/10/06

Its questionable if we should be giving a pronounciation at all. For many surnames pronounciation is a matter of individuality, particularily those that are not common or not English, and a largely trivial matter except where its a running gag, etc, such as the Hyacinth Bucket character. Djegan 22:30, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Release Controversy

I have updated that point in the article to reflect the fact that the person concerned has now been re-arrested following the successful appeal by the State in the Supreme Court. It was the High Court that decided to release this man beforehand under its interpretation of the Supreme Court's earlier ruling on the law concerned statutory rape.

Date formatting

Would the anonymous user(s) please stop reverting the date formatting? It is there because some people have different display options set for viewing the date and the formatting displays the date as the user wishes to see it. Consult WP:MOS it your are still confused! Snappy56 19:11, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gangland Crime

This has been extensively reported in print media and updating McDowell's reaction to this has been removed without discussion by user:demiurge. I have reverted this and await demiurges justification for his removal of cited relevant material. 00:16, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Because your edits are either non-neutral or of unclear relevance (why do we care that McDowell said "I see what I see and I know what I know"? What is the importance of this?), or even misleading (only 2 of the 23 gang members in [1] had bail agreed to by the gardai). See WP:NPOV. I've rewritten your insertions in a neutral manner; please keep in mind that Wikipedia is not a soapbox for you to criticise McDowell. Demiurge 09:30, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"I see what I see, I know what I know"

This statment made in an interview reflects McDowell's outlook. It was used originaly as an answer to a question, upon which he did not wish to elaborate. Statements by politicians should be clear and arguements rationaly developed. To make a bald statement "I see what I see, I know what I know" shows that McDowell did, in that instance, not follow those principles and reflects a "trust me, I know", possibly appropriate to talking to four year olds, inappropriate to the voting public. Accordingly it is appropriate to cite this as a reflection on McDowell the politician. 01:22, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

That's your POV and does not belong in the article. Demiurge 09:16, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- The link to this is a Dail debate and the quotation is by opposition leader Enda Kenny. It is not POV if stated in a public forum by a relaible source. It is opposition leader's take on situation and is valid comment. Please restore.

Tayana 15:45, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Except Enda Kenny said nothing like what you have said above in [2], that is all your own interpretation and original research. If we leave out your own interpretation, the quote is irrelevant and lacks context. If we include your own interpretation to establish context, it's POV. So I conclude that it should be omitted altogether. Please note that the controversy over McDowell's reaction (or lack thereof) to the statutory rape case is already well covered in the article. Demiurge 16:09, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Demiurge you state that Wikipedia is not a soapbox for users to criticise Minister McDowell- that is true. But Demiurge I think you demur with far too much vigour. It is also not a soapbox for people to champion him. His 'see what I see...' statement is arguably one of the greatest insights into the workings of his finely tuned political mind. He's letting people know he knows what they know, and to hell with judicial and political mechanisms. It's a battle cry to the embatttled victims of crime- and also, let us be clear, nonsense. it belongs in the article as it will in time define his legacy.--The Three Jays 01:06, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Minister is often subject to harsh satire in Ireland and this has feed an impression of him as evil.

That quote was an answer to a question, it cannot be extracted from a transcript and placed in this article with some claim that it represents his worldview.AleXd (talk) 08:56, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Party Leadership

The comment on his new salary in "Party Leadership" section insinuates that he struck Mary Harney out in a coup to earn more money is unjustified.

Controversies:Statuatory Rape case

While Michael McDowell was criticised for the Statuory Rape case he was not actually at fault. Therefore while Wikipedia can report that he was criticised, it should be made clear that the decision was a complete shock to the whole country, the Minister for Justice included.

True, the point is really that the media were hysterical rather than the Minister actually doing anything wrong.AleXd (talk) 08:45, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Controversies: Richard Bruton incident

While the reporting of the unfair comparsion he made of Richard Bruton is correct, the articles implies that he failed in his pledge to increase the Gardai numbers, while in Sept 2005 only six new Garda had joined it takes two years to train them. The present class in the Training College was significantly larger than previously following refurbishment and extension of their buildings.

Opinion articles presented as fact

Presenting assertions made in opinion articles as fact ("terrified of the howling mob") isn't on. Also the lengthy verbatim quotes from Vincent Browne's criticism contain only opinion and no facts. Accordingly I have removed these sections. Demiurge 22:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Has he died, dismissed or resigned?

Please read the constitution (Article 28.11.2)

The members of the Government in office at the date of a dissolution of Dáil Éireann shall continue to hold office until their successors shall have been appointed.

So he is still a member of the government, whatever the result of the election, unless he has died, or was dismissed or resigned from government!

Djegan 19:59, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As for dates into the future wikipedia is not a crystal ball! Djegan 20:08, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mr Mc Dowell continues as a minister til 14th june when his period of office must end constitutionally he ceased to be a TD on 29th April when Dail was dissolved ~~

How do we know that a successor will be created that date, maybe before? Their are too many possibilities! We are not a crystal ball. Djegan 20:15, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed I believe the above section of the constitution was specifically put in place after the enactment to ensure continuance of government in unforseen circumstances, eg if the Dail could not meet. Djegan 20:20, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above section was always in the constitution from its enactment. He cannot be replaced before 14th Juneunless he formally resigns or is sacked (possible but not likely). He is likely to be replaced on that date as it is the first date on which the 30th Dail sits. Usually a new government is formed on the first day the Dail sits bit not always. User:Rigger30

I still believe we should not have an end date until it becomes fact; we are not a crystal ball, better something be emitted than an assumption, WP:VERIFY. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Djegan

Ah, sorry. Didn't see talk before removing the fact tag. Makes sense. Bastun^{BaStun not BaTsun} 21:44, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps Djegan is correct in saying that this is not a crystal ball. In that case I am prepared to conceed that the end of term should not appear as regards his position as minister and tanaiste until he formally leaves office, most likely on 14th June. I still contend that his term of office as a TD ended on 29th April when the Dail was dissolved. Rigger30 11:36, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would contend that he ceased to be a TD when the new Dáil was elected on 24 May 2007. Although the 29th Dáil was dissolved on 29 April, he continued to be a TD until a successor was elected. Snappy56 17:43, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would be worth checking the constitution or law for that. Djegan 22:56, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is what I found on the Oireachtas site [3], it appears April 30th is the favoured date. Djegan 23:30, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citations in Succession box

There is no need for citations in the succession box. It just adds visual clutter. It's also unprecedented. I haven't seen it done anywhere before. If you're going to do it for one, then you should do it for each individual succession of each person! Snappy56 19:29, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As much as its possible, I will add sources to my edits. If somebody elses wishes to remove them, fair enough. I see no harm on letting people know where the material is coming from and therefore more accurate. ant_ie 22:12, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I checked Wikipedia:Verifiability and I assume that we dont see many citations in succession boxs is the material is unlikey to be challenge.I seem to learn something new every day.ant_ie 22:23, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Teachta Dala cat

Lapsed pacifist, will you stop removing the category Teachta Dála from this article. All current and former TDs are in this category regardless of whatever other categories they are in. Are you planning to remove this cat from all 729 articles that are in it or is it just Michael McDowell you've got something against? Snappy56 (talk)

McDowell is already in this category by virtue of being in the Members of the 25th, 27th, 29th Dail subcategories. You're right, superfluous categories should always be removed. I hope this labour will not be left to me alone. My opinion (or yours) of McDowell isn't relevant here at all. Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 10:41, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you've got the wrong end of the stick, this isn't how these categories work. These used to be a Former TD category but in was deleted and all current and former were put in the Teachta Dála category. I'll leave a note on BrownHairedGirls page, she's the most expert editor on categories that I've met on wikipedia. She'll know who goes in what category; until do not make any changes to this or other TD articles. Snappy56 (talk) 10:49, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding of categorisation is that if a subject fits in both Category A and Category B, and Category A is a subcategory of Category B, then only A is used. I don't need your permission to edit articles, Snap. Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 14:29, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I simply asked not to remove the category until an "expert" had commented. Are you now going to edit the other 728 TD articles? Snappy56 (talk) 04:44, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Given time.

Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 09:42, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are not an expert. live with it. Snappy56 (talk) 13:33, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And what's the reason you reverted my changes to the references? and stop adding in invalid date formats which violate the MoS. I mean you left the opening sentence with an invalid red link. Snappy56 (talk) 10:34, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're blanking text now with your reverts. There's nothing wrong with linking to the month of a particular year. I've seen many red links become blue, have patience. Where's your expert?

Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 17:52, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haven't see any dates done the way you are doing them, not in MoS, See Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers)#Autoformatting_and_linking. Don't need an expert to know about date formatting. Not blanking anything, just removed one sarky remark. Snappy56 (talk) 02:32, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If something happens on the 25/05/08, linking to May 2008 is more relevant than either 25 May or 2008. 25 May 2008 would be better again, but Wikipedia is still growing. None of this resolves the underlying problems with your edits, including, blanking, insisting on the unnecessary retention of superfluous categories, and sometimes your tone. You asked me to cease editing here before your expert has spoken, Snap, but you don't seem to regard yourself as having to be similarly constrained.

Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 14:54, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If a matter of display the date format according to user prefs rather forcing a particular format on someone, e.g. 25 May or May 25 or 25-05. In regard to your other points: I haven't blanked any of your recent additions, I removed one unencyclopedic sarky remark, the rest are all still there; You have blanked my changes to the refs which I have updated to the cite web format; I don't know what you mean by my tone, I could take issue with yours if I wanted; As a gesture of good faith, I have removed the so called superfluous TD category until someone else can comment (BHG seems to be on a break). This will allow you to start removing the category from the other 730 articles that is it on. Snappy56 (talk) 02:30, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can't fully understand your first sentence as your syntax is most unusual, but I believe I have the gist of it. I've restored the blanked text. You may remove all the "sarky" comments you care to, but don't pretend that can include any of my edits. In the meantime, have a read of Wikipedia:FAQ/Categorization. It will make you less reliant on other editors.

Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 12:41, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah whatever, am adding back TD cat until an expert comments. Snappy56 (talk) 23:38, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have already commented.

Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 09:55, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment all you like, you are not expert, live with it! Snappy56 (talk) 13:43, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If after a full discussion, a consensus is achieved to remove the individual articles from the TD category, it will obviously be a bot task to remove all 730 of them. So, do not remove piecemeal here and there when you are editing a TD's article, the category should not be partially populated. Snappy56 (talk) 23:42, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Which part of the above statement is unclear? Snappy56 (talk) 13:04, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

'He reformed the prison service'

I have removed the claim that McDowell reformed the Irish Prison Service. I would have no problem with it if it were backed up with a citation. Also, the claim that the pay was 'exorbitant' is opinion, not fact. Stephen Shaw (talk) 23:14, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved to Michael McDowell (politician) and dab page to Michael McDowell. Favonian (talk) 17:44, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Michael McDowell → Michael McDowell (Irish politican) – I'm not sure this is a clear enough WP:PRIMARYTOPIC that it should be at the "main" page instead of the dab (currently at Michael McDowell (disambiguation)) being at it. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 03:23, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support Although I had heard of the Irish politician but not the others, it's not clear that he is primary. This is the awkward situation we have sometimes, trying to judge notability between different areas of human activity. However we have the sheer number of people of this name, some of the writers and racing drivers don't look like particularly minor figures, and the Irish politician wasn't a hugely important figure even in terms of Irish politics. "Michael McDowell (politician)" would be adequate. PatGallacher (talk) 09:49, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Looking at the page view stats, I have to agree with The Bushranger and Pat. Michael McDowell (author) actually got more page views than the politician last month. But I do agree with Pat that "Irish politican" is overly precise in this case, Michael McDowell (politican) will be fine as there are no other politicians of this name. Jenks24 (talk) 07:48, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Michael McDowell (politician). 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/20080829183018/http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0%2C%2C30200-1266479%2C00.html to http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0%2C%2C30200-1266479%2C00.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) 16:51, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Michael McDowell (politician). 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:

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) 23:57, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]