Talk:Miosgán Meadhbha

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

Historic sites Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Historic sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of historic sites 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.Historic sitesWikipedia:WikiProject Historic sitesTemplate:WikiProject Historic sitesHistoric sites articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archaeology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology 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.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Death Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death 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.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women's History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles 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.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

How is this really spelled?

The page title is "Miosgán Médhbh" but then the article starts out with "Miosgán Méabh"... Please, someone who knows, fix it... Gnuish (talk) 08:52, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Miosgán Médhbh. 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/20140426222520/http://www.sligo.ie/whysligo/ancientplaces/ to http://www.sligo.ie/whysligo/ancientplaces/

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) 18:13, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong page move

This page move needs to ne reverted and the redirect removed. There are two problems, there is no usage of Queen Maeves tomb as a universal in English, its almont equally referred to as Maeves cairn/grave. etc but very rarely tomb. This is a modern idea. More importantly, there are several places in Connacht referred to as the burial place of Maeve as she ids a goddess associated with the province. An article on these collectively could perhaps be justified, but one one implying this IS her tomb, is incorrect and ahistorical and not in folklore or archaeological evidence. I recommend reverting for these reasons and will do so if there is no response to this after a while.

People need to be aware also that because of the history of English language suppression of Irish placenmanes there are issues with blanket naming in placenames in English as it can accelarate colonial masking of Irish places. Xx78900 Kodai (talk) 17:42, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kodai, I didn't mean to step on anyone's toes moving this. It's a fairly small and sparsely edited article, and I thought that moving it would be uncontroversial, which is why I didn't check on the talk page first: for that, I do apologise. I'm not sure I agree with you that the article title should be reverted. Changing it to Queen Maeve's Cairn I would accept, as I have since discovered that that is the monument's official name according to document from the National Monuments Service (forgiving them that they actually spell it "Meave", but they do have a small number of typos in other documents). As you say, there isn't really a WP:COMMONNAME in English, but I think that all of the English names are used more commonly than the Irish, and I think that an English title is in line with WP:EN. If your suggestion was for any alternate spelling of Medb/Maedhbh/Méibh/Maeve in particular, or for Cairn or Grave above tomb (though anecdotally I am much more familiar with tomb), than I would support the move, and I think a "Naming" heading could be added: in fact I think one is already necessitated by the various ways one can smell Maedhbh. If we look at WP:CRITERIA, then I think we gain the first two (Recognisability and Naturalness) at minor expense of the third (Precision). Also a disambiguation page would be sufficient for other articles which may also be called Queen Maeve's Tomb/Grave/Cairn.

In reply to the elements of your post not directly related to Wikipedia policy, I am well aware of the erosion of Irish language placenames in the popular consciousness. I studied Irish at third level, including Logainmníocht. But this is not Vicipéid, it is Wikipedia. Anuas ar sin, ní fiú logainm í Miosgán Mhaedhbha, ach cairn lonaithe ar bharr Chnoic na Riaibh.. It's no more an aspect of colonization to use English proper nouns than the rest of the language.Xx78900 (talk) 22:57, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree we should use English here; the precise form can be discussed. Johnbod (talk) 03:20, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for getting back - in relation to WP:EN the national monuments name Queen Maeves Cairn. i get the point and i agree that in general that would make sense, but

I have a caveat that there can be serious problems with WP:EN serving to accelerate Irish name erosion, and that includes the National Monuments which doesnt necessarily help in these situations. you acknowledge it but dont suggest any way of ameliorating it?

i see on logainm the irish spelling is Meascán Mhéabha, and so is different again. i think there is a strong argument for using the irish names as the primary page name because the english is not a translation and nor is it a set designation, but just various descriptions, including grave/tomb/cairn/ etc? The correct name in translation is "maeves pat of butter" lol, but that is not well known.whatever the wiki decides, this becomes the default actual name, and so i think it needs to be dealt with carefully.

Which leaves this other issue, i responded to the use of "tomb" because there are two other reputed burial places in Connacht , Knockma in Galway and at Rathcroghan County Roscommon. I guess these can be dealt with or noted within the article. But Knockma there is also a cairn reputed to be Queen Maeves burial place although its far less well known.So the issue then is that the Sligo cairn effectively becomes the de facto Maeves burial Cairn, which is false. The Wikipedia page for knockma is titled in Irish as Cnoc Meadha, which is naming in line with the original article for sligo? so do we also change this to Queen Maeves Cairn and have two? or maeves hill? or use the english corruption knockma? see i think there are myriad problems trying to name everything in English when there arent really english names and they are just causing confusion. WP:EN is destructive in an irish historical context.

an example of similar problems is Uluru/ Ayers rock. if we use the WP:EN interpretation people are suggesting here then that would be Ayers rock on EN Wiki and onlu on pitjanjara wiki is Uluru relevant? this would effectively eliminate the aboriginal name, and the colonial language name becomes the default, here the wiki is completing the process of elimination of a culture. i believe the same thinking needs to be applied here. on the En Wiki Uluru is the page title and redirects are used from Ayers rock to the original name.

there seems to me two ways

to use the original irish perhaps as in logainm ie and set redirects from the common english terms, which are variously grave/cairn etc, as only the irish name is unique - the wiki is a gateway to preserving the placenames links

or to use the NMS version as you suggest of Queen Maeves Cairn which is descriptive and include disambiguation or indicate there are other cairns called this in the article. this continues the masking process i think.

i lay out the issues here from archaeological perspective as they apply across the board to historical objects and sites in ireland and i think it warrants a policy beyond, "this is the common name" as, like uluru, this has implications. Kodai (talk) 17:32, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I too agree with that WP:EN applies here.

As for the name, @Xx78900 linked to the "Monuments in State Care" document, which lists it as Queen Meave's Tomb. That's the name I vote for (with the typo of Meave fixed to Maeve). Cashew.wheel (talk) 10:24, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some observations:

When I did a Google Books search for "Maeve's Cairn" OR "Maeve's Tomb" (it may turn up different results for other users), only two of the first 30 results had "Queen Maeve" in them. Those 30 were overwhelmingly in favour of "Maeve's Cairn".
In Edward O'Reilly's 1864 Irish–English Dictionary, Miosgán Méidhbhe was given as "Meave's heap, the name of a large heap of stones on the hill of Knocknarea, in the county of Sligo..."
The related Commons category is Maeve's Cairn. Although most of the files – many of them uploaded by a single user – are titled "Queen Maeve's Tomb", there is also "Maeve's Cairn", "Maeve's Grave", "Queen Maeve's Rocks", "Queen Meave" and "medb".
Ergo, no English title can claim to be the COMMONNAME.
The edit that changed the article added "[it] is said to the resting place of Medb, who according to Irish folklore was once the queen of Connacht." This is unsourced.
The same edit added a cite to a journal article, but that article does not give any English name to the monument, consistently calling it Miosgán Meadhbha
This article links to Brú na Bóinne, which is not at Boyne valley tombs. As Kodai notes, Cnoc Meadha, another putative resting place of Maeve, is also at its Irish name.

For consistency, therefore, the article should go back to its Irish title. Scolaire (talk) 18:09, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Placenames Database of Ireland gives the official name as Miosgan Meva (Meascán Mhéabha) with the alternative name Maeve's Cairn. However, I think this article should be re-directed to Knocknarea#Maeve's Cairn. It would be better to deal with them on the same article, as there's very little that could be added to either. ~Asarlaí 13:50, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well spotted! I would agree with making it a redirect. Scolaire (talk) 16:09, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The naming thing I'm not as passionate about, but I do feel quite strongly that Miosgan Meva should be its own article, I think it has the potential to be developed as I think there is more that could be added to it. Xx78900 (talk) 16:57, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

can see theres no official name in English and no agreed spelling in Irish it seem We may have to lock down a spelling thats at least somewhat consistent in modern Irish. Ive not seen V used like that before, but perhaps those with more Irish knowledge can weigh in on it. The spelling used on the original page was old Irish variation. Im happy with whatever decided on the name i guess.

On the page, i agree with Xx78900 that the cairn warrants its own page. There is a lot of info on the cairn and its archaeology and history that can be added to the article as it develops, although its just a stub right now, There are articles also on controversies and issues of access and debates on its state etc in local and national papers over the years, so i definitely recommend keeping it in its own page. Kodai (talk) 00:04, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

From the discussion to date, it's clear that "Queen Maeve's Tomb" (or Queen Maeve's anything) is the least appropriate title. I'm moving it to Miosgán Meadhbha per the source cited in the article, until some sort of consensus emerges. Scolaire (talk) 16:23, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]