It’s not clear to me why the last paragraph is included in such detail. That Robinson was narrowly re-elected to the Seanad is all that matters, surely.
 DoneYou're right. I was writing this article and that of Robinson's legal career at the same time so some things got muddled. Shortened now.Xx78900 (talk) 22:15, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This long section could do with being split into subsections.
 Half done I've added subsection, though now the bit about FLACs is just floating under The right of women to sit on juries - thoughts?Xx78900 (talk) 22:15, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
the Ireland entered – ‘Ireland entered’.
- DoneXx78900 (talk) 22:15, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A result of this membership were that two key goals of Robinson were met – ‘Two key goals of Robinson were thus met’ is more concise.
- Done
as conditions of – ‘as a condition of’.
 Not done Is this correct? I'm talking about two things, both of which were conditions of entry.Xx78900 (talk) 22:15, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Now not sure, so let's assume you are right. AM
That same year, Robinson first served on the Joint Committee on the Secondary Legislation of the European Communities, which she remained a member of until her retirement from the Seanad. Also in 1973, Robinson - 'In 1973 Robinson first served on the Joint Committee on the Secondary Legislation of the European Communities—which she remained a member of until her retirement from the Seanad—and she’.
- DoneXx78900 (talk) 22:15, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Link called to the bar of England and Wales (Call to the bar); Fine Gael (moved from later in the section); Oireachtas; Conor Cruise O'Brien; penal reform.
Half done All of the above linked, though I didn't include "of England and Wales" in the call to the bar link.Xx78900 (talk) 22:15, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Robinson again introduced – ‘she again introduced’ sounds better imo.
- DoneXx78900 (talk) 22:15, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Put a comma after defeated in a vote to improve the prose.
- DoneXx78900 (talk) 22:15, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This led to Robinson - There’s a lot going on here, I would replace this with the thing being referred to, to help readers know what is being being referred to.
- Done
widely publicised – is too vague imo.
- I would contend that if it wasn't widely publicised it wouldn't really be worth mentioning - and axiomatic to such a phrase it would be unwieldy to list everywhere it was publicised.Xx78900 (talk) 22:15, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Apologies for nor being clearer, I meant that the context of being "widely publicised" needs to be more specific, perhaps 'widely publicised throughout Ireland'? Amitchell125 (talk) 06:00, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- DoneXx78900 (talk) 14:02, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
political traction – I’m not clear what this actually means.
- She was hoping that as a result of their being a more liberal party in government, she as a liberal politician, would be able to further promote her own political agenda.Xx78900 (talk) 22:15, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for this, but other readers might also benefit from the text being rephrased (or expanded?) to help with this phrase, which is slightly idiomatic. Amitchell125 (talk) 06:03, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- DoneXx78900 (talk) 14:02, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also in 1974, Robinson sought to address the issue of - ‘In 1974, Robinson sought again to address the issue of’?
- DoneXx78900 (talk) 22:15, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Then-senator Michael D. Higgins participated in the debate - Then-senator seems redundant, as only serving senators could take part in the debate.
- Yes, but Michael D. Higgins is best known for, like Robinson, later being elected president of Ireland (a role he still occupies). I think for future readers who may not have the exact dates in their head about when each was a senator/president and may not be aware that the president couldn't weigh in on parliamentary debate, it could be useful to specify. I'm open to changing the wording though, or if you feel passionately that it is inappropriate, removing it entirely.Xx78900 (talk) 22:15, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Unfortunately I don't think you can assume that readers are aware who the president of Ireland currently is. I would consider replacing Then-senator Michael D. Higgins participated in the debate, arguing with 'Senator Michael D. Higgins, who participated in the debate, argued'. Amitchell125 (talk) 06:09, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- DoneXx78900 (talk) 14:02, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The debate was eventually adjourned, but no further debate ever followed - ‘The debate was abandoned’?
- Well, adjournment implies debate will be returned to. I suppose it was effectively abandoned, but on a technicality it wasn't. That said, I understand that sometimes such nuance is best left to source material. What do you think?Xx78900 (talk) 22:15, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- I think we can leave it as it is. AM
I think a new paragraph could be made after Robinson had more success.
- Done, but after having added subheadings, are the pargraphs I've split a bit short? Let me know.Xx78900 (talk) 22:15, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comma after seeking to adopt.
- Done
sat on a jury - ‘sat on a Republic of Ireland jury’?
- Done, I said "sat on a jury in Ireland". Ireland is used throughout the article to refer to the nation as opposed to the island, with Republic of Ireland only being mentioned in a quote from Robinson. I can change this if you like? Though I personally feel it unnecessary, given that Northern Ireland is specifically mentioned where relevant.Xx78900 (talk) 22:15, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
permitted every Irish citizen – ‘gave every Irish citizen’.
- Done, though I said "granted" instead of "gave".Xx78900 (talk) 22:15, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comma after and be accepted.
- DoneXx78900 (talk) 22:15, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Consider deleting the vague-sounding for quite some time.
- DoneXx78900 (talk) 22:15, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- DoneXx78900 (talk) 22:15, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
More comments to follow, the article is a lot better than this rather alarmingly long list of issues to be addressed might imply. Amitchell125 (talk) 15:41, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- It is, in fairness, also a rather long article! I really appreciate the thoroughness of your review, I think it's helped the page greatly!Xx78900 (talk) 22:15, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
|
