1762:
fact, this sort of information could be used to expand the article, rather than delete it. The second part, about the notability of the term, merely gives your opinion about its notability. If it is as non-notable as you claim, why is it still being mentioned in books written many, many years later? And do you really want to question a footnote to a specific printed source simply because another
Knowledge (XXG) article doesn't mention it? I don't get that. The article, even in its current brief form, is both accurate and verifiable, is it not? And it explains a term whose meaning is not completely self-evident. This isn't fancruft, or anything. It's a term relating to an important part of history. Someone could easily come across it in their reading, and wonder what exactly it means. Why should Knowledge (XXG) not tell them? -
1746:
history. As to the salient point of this discussion, like I have said above, it was a minority view based on ignorance. Ignorance in this case being the real motives of those promoting and encouraging this fear. All of which could and should be covered in the article on Home Rule. The term is not notable, the article is not likely to be expanded, and the source used to support it i.e. John Bright is dubious and I suggest should be checked, since his own article makes not mention of it. As to how often it is used in relation to this subject, please cite sources. I replaced the {prod} tag, simply because the arguments for keeping it were in my opinion spurious, and not based on any of our policies, but on opinion only. --
78:
53:
1207:
a time
Cardinal Cullen satisfaction with the British Government for carrying the Protestant Churchâs Disestablishment made it difficult for the hierarchy to bestow this, however much individual priests might see that the Home Rule movement was developing a popular dynamic of its own. The gradual withdrawal of Protestant support from the movement made things easier. Increased Catholic support made Protestant withdrawal faster. In stead of the movement being regarded as a movement against Home Rule, the belief that âHome Rule means âRome Ruleâ now took root as the traditional basis of opposition to the movement. This in turn inevitably made it increasingly sympathetic to many Catholics.
1409:
have about .5% as many articles as WP, and even they have an (admittedly poor) article on this. And they do allegedly have higher standards than we do. You've given no strong reasons for deletion. But you're right, there is no ideal place to redirect this to, which is why I prefer it on its own. I just think that if someone searches for this term, they should get some sort of result explaining it, not a "nope, never heard of it. Probably made up" which is what deletion would seem to imply. This whole discussion smells to me of
1019:
1378:
that's some sort of standard of quality, are you? That article is even worse than this one! You have shown no grounds whatever for keeping the article - the only possible grounds for keeping it is that you can make an article of it, and after seven days we have been unable to get beyond those lame two sentences. And redirect to what? Do we have an article on "an institution or person who is heavily influenced by the Roman
Catholic Church"? If we do, we shouldn't.
592:
571:
1858:
independence, right from 1886 through to 1914 and later. For
Unionist the question was not simply unionism for its own sake, but deep down a fear of, and a need to protect themselves against Rome Rule, which ultimately led to partition, remaining at the root of sectarianism, ultimately leading to partition within partition. If this AfD goes ahead the definition will be reinstated as a foot note in the articles it is mentioned in.
710:
321:
420:
395:
487:
311:
466:
290:
1663:: "The point of the Ulster opposition to home rule is, of course, the fear that, if it be granted to Ireland, the Protestant minority will not receive justice at the hands of the Catholic majority". Even in the 1930s there was still a fear amongst Protestants in Northern Ireland that unification with the Irish Free State would mean Catholic domination. This article could be considerably longer.--
1947:
contraception and divorce and a special constitutional position for the
Catholic Church all became state law. Into the 1960s, many Irish restaurants refused to serve meat on Fridays, the National University made Catholic feast days into holidays, and RTE even broadcast the Angelus twice-daily: all incompatible with a secular republic. Myers, Kevin: Irish Independent p.28 Comment, 4 May 2011.
602:
497:
154:
64:
22:
1783:
Ireland. The source for who coined it is not dubious, it is published by the Oxford
University Press and the book is part of the New Oxford History of England and authored by an experienced historian. I'm not surprised the Knowledge (XXG) article doesn't mention it: it is a poorly sourced article with only one footnote. I know who I would rather believe out of the two.--
973:
210:
192:
220:
2009:â, it was preceded by his asking Northern Ireland's critics "to remember that in the south they boasted of a Catholic state". But, in an overwhelmingly Catholic Ireland, the old Unionist taunt that 'Home Rule would mean Rome Rule' had no force because Rome Rule had become more a cause for pride than for shame. ...In
1946:
Protestants didnât make waves, they didnât cause a fuss, they got on with their lives, and endured whatever degree of
Catholic governance that DĂĄil Ăireann wished to impose upon them. The Ulster Unionist warning had turned out to be accurate: Home Rule was Rome Rule, as draconian censorship, a ban on
1761:
The first part of your argument is irrelevant to the deletion discussion. The extent to which fear, or perceived fear, of an
Catholic government existed, and whether or not it was based on ignorance or fearmongering, have nothing to do with the relevance of the term or the accuracy of the article. In
1540:
dab page be removed because it is unlikely to ever be an article? Have sources written about it?). For what it's worth, Rome Rule is more brief, and therefore more likely to be searched for, and, more importantly, unlike the others it isn't completely self evident and warrants some explanation. There
1279:
The entire phrase, "Home Rule is Rome Rule", is nothing more than a slogan that was used by certain people at a certain point in time. In the last hundred years it is more common as a catchphrase used by writers of popular history (like Kee) than an actual expression of policy or philosophy. Its use
1206:
Like OâConnellâs Repeal, Home Rule in the early stages combined the attractions of national sentiment with the attractions of a social panacea. But no movement in
Ireland could effectively become a national movement with out in the end securing at least the benevolence of the Catholic Church. And for
1193:
I have removed the reference as it clearly dose not reflect the source cited. It dose not specify who said it, when and how much used it enjoyed then or now. It is devoide of context and therefore distorts is meaning. For example, was it used because of the
Protestant Churchâs Disestablishment by the
1880:
With all due respect, Osioni, if you're going to contribute to a discussion you should read it first. Firstly, nobody ever suggested the article should be deleted "just because it is regarded as a red rag in certain circles"; the reasons were clearly stated and discussed on their merits. Secondly,
1801:
Actually, the whole issue of civil war is more complex than that, but that's an entirely separate issue. But to the point, it seems if people do want this deleted, they should initiate an AFD. The prod is out (it was never a serious prod candidate anyway; it was pretty clear this was not going to be
1531:
I think your reasoning is flawed here. Rome Rule is almost always mentioned in the context of Home Rule, so removing it from a search will of course give skewed results. That does not necessarily mean that it has never been used outside of the phrase "Home Rule is Rome Rule", nor does it matter that
1377:
without discussing it first. By saying "if it's not going to be an article it should be a redirect" you are more or less admitting that it can't be an article. That means it's non-notable. "Well known enough" has nothing to do with notability. And as for Citizendium - you're not going to tell me
1340:
If it's not going to be an article it should be a redirect. It's well known enough. We have plenty on articles on other slogans and phrases. Scolaire's second point above is useless. If you remove "home rule" from searches of course you're not going to get many relevant results (you might a well say
1408:
an article, just a very short one. If we deleted every substub from wikipedia we'd lose about 10% of our articles. That's no reason to delete. And it is a notable phrase. It's appeared in many books, and, as you've pointed out, it appears in several articles. My point about Citizendium is that they
1685:
I don't think many people would deny that that fear, or concern, or belief did exist. The problem here is that, of itself, it doesn't seem to have been written about. Your link is fascinating, and thank you for drawing it to our attention, but the quote you have taken from it is not not the main
1658:
No. A fear among Protestants that they would be in a permanent minority in an Ireland with its own parliament, dominated by a Catholic majority, was very real. This is why Randolph Churchill deployed the "Orange card" because he knew it would be so effective. Ireland was on the brink of civil war
1857:
Absolutely NO WAY should this definition be deleted just because it is regarded as a red rag in certain circles. If only for that reason it needs to remain actively defined, but in particular because fear of it was one of the key issues in resistance to Home Rule, and indeed to any kind of Irish
1782:
were armed for no reason and that their aim to fight for Home Rule would not lead to civil war in Ireland. The motivation behind a fear of "Rome Rule" is irrelevant to whether it existed: what is relevant is that such a fear certainly did exist and existed among a large number of Protestants in
1061:
cannon law rather than the law of the land), had it been take to the Supreme Court, would have been found repugnant to the Consitution. Despite great pressure at the time from the Catholic Church (which had succeed in inserting such clauses in the Spanish and Italian constitutions), de Valera
1745:
The Orange Card was to promote sectarian division, and encourage a fear among Protestants. Who were the Unionists threatening to fight against Home Rule, the British Government? So how can you suggest there was going to be civil war in Ireland? You I would suggest, have a very bizarre view of
1690:, and Dicey's article on WP suggests that he was not himself concerned with Catholic Church influence in Ireland, but rather with the constitutional position of Ireland. As I said to R. fiend above, all that is needed here is to establish notability by pointing to sources that have written
1170:
might work, but I generally don't like redirects in which you have to read3/4 of the article to find the redirected term. I'm sure there's enough information on Unionist religious opposition to Home Rule, as well as the Catholic Church and the Free State government for an article on this.
1550:
We have two independent reliable sources covering the term and its use, which, for a two sentence article is pretty damn good. (BTW, I'm unsure what an non-independent source would be, is the term going to write about itself?) Anyway, I'm going to remove the template again. Removing them
1165:
If it's not going to be an article it at least needs to be a redirect. It is (or was) a common enough term that someone looking for what it means should be given some basic information. The article as it stands now is pretty weak, but it is neutral and accurate. A merge/redirect to
1280:
in WP is invariably accompanied by weasel words like "many felt that..." Other, arguably better known, slogans such as "Ulster will fight and Ulster will be right", "a protestant parliament for a protestant people" or "No surrender" do not have their own articles (although
1009:
I think this last sentence needs rephrasing for clarity and NPOV: Are we referring to abortion? the death penalty? euthanasia? contraception? war and peace? stem cell research? Please believe me, I don't want to start a polemic; I just think we should be more specific.
1544:
We seems to have one reliable source indicating the origin of the phrase. But again, that hardly matters. Many notable terms have mysterious origins. The uncertainty here just demonstrates that its use was widespread enough that it wasn't associated with a single
1541:
are many people who do not immediately associate the Catholic Church with any mention of "Rome", and who could easily be unsure of what it refers to, or how Italians enter into the situation. "Ulster will fight and Ulster will be right" is pretty straightforward.
1942:"I'm removing this because it seems to be an improperly cited quote from one journalist whose reputation is, let's say, "questionable" (e.g. tinyurl dot com/3w8jz) If not, although I agree with it, it's clearly more opinion than objective analysis."
1535:
The term generally was used as part of a slogan, but that's not a reason for deletion either. And despite your assertions, it doesn't use weasel words. That other slogans don't have articles is neither here nor there (should the entry on the
1088:
have an article (44.1.2) reading - "The State recognises the special position of the Holy Catholic Apostolic and Roman Church as the guardian of the Faith professed by the great majority of the citizens." This was repealed in the
1593:
I agree that the template should not have been replaced. We need to go to AfD if we want to progress this. Thank you for answering my arguments in detail. I have taken what you say on board and I'll post a reply later.
1131:
I'm not convinced that it's notable enough to be an article. I'm not going to prod it just yet, until I see if somebody can make an article of it, but if it hasn't been substantially expanded in the next week I will.
940:
63:
1523:
Okay, you did give reasons for deletion; I just happen to think they're not very strong. Sure, no one's written a book about the term "Rome Rule", but it is covered in other sources. As for your other arguments:
2066:
118:
1527:
I think it can be expanded. Just because it hasn't in several days doesn't mean it can't be. Sure, it will never be a featured article, but I think there' the potential for a couple short paragraphs, which is
1972:
died in 1949, the first president of Ireland, and was buried from St Patrick's cathedral; the cabinet did not attend but waited at the railings outside because they could not enter a protestant church. See -
124:
1459:, and articles can only be added when the subjects have been written about elsewhere." Now, the fact is, "it is a notable phrase; it's appeared in many books" does not mean that other sources have written
1287:
Little or nothing is actually known about the origin of the phrase or its use in speeches in the 19th and early 20th century. This article cites a source saying it was coined by John Bright, yet the
2076:
266:
1899:
Yes, sorry Scolaire how very right you are, apologies, my alert button triggered on seeing "the discussion is not going anywhere" and interpreted imminent deletion. Will see what I can turn up.
94:
860:
2061:
1644:"fear of Catholic domination," was a ploy used by very few (minority term), and nothing to do with the real issues surrounding HR. This stub is going no where, and should be deleted. --
1881:
the AfD is already closed and the result was "keep". At the risk of sounding like a stuck record, what's needed now is somebody to write the article instead of telling us why there
85:
58:
1062:
specifically refused to include any special place for that Church in the constition. So, whereas it was certainly true in the 1950s that the RC Church was revered in the nation
272:
2096:
1036:
to me. Why is that sentence there? What does it have to do with anything? I will delete it: the editor responsible may reinsert it if he provides a context and clarity. --
2071:
747:
553:
1451:; substituting the subject of this article we have: "In other words, may well be the greatest example of what they do in the history of everything, but if no other
2081:
2006:
663:
1090:
1443:
You shouldn't quote Knowledge (XXG) essays without reading them first. I have given four reasoned arguments at the start of this section, none of which express
242:
2111:
1950:
I am preserving the deleted text here because I am not in agreement with the anonymous deletion for the reason given - "alhough '24.11.168.41' agrees with it!"
1093:
that became law in January 1973. However Tilson came decades after the Rome Rule arguments had been made, and so it is not essential to the main page, plus the
543:
2126:
764:
653:
983:
426:
400:
377:
2116:
519:
2131:
2013:'s words, the Vatican seems "to misunderstand the earthquake they have set off in society. Whatever happens, it is the end of the age of deference."
779:
729:
233:
197:
2091:
874:
743:
367:
1273:
2106:
2101:
1489:
I fully intend to take this to AfD. You can forestall me at any time by properly establishing notability and starting to expand the article.
2121:
510:
471:
343:
77:
52:
1094:
1005:"All major Christian denominations have very similar views on ethical matters related to human life and press that view whenever possible."
2039:
1018:
799:
629:
620:
576:
2002:
1098:
825:
1978:
1694:
this topic, rather than mention it in passing or re-cycle an old cliché. Once that is done the deletion debate ends. Over to you.
836:
2086:
1629:) and the relationship between resistance to Home Rule and a fear of Catholic domination has the makings of a lengthy article.--
1555:
the procedure for contesting prods, and they're not supposed to be put back. This isn't AFD, and shouldn;t be treated as such. -
1269:
It has not been possible to expand it beyond what it is now i.e. there is not enough in the subject for an encyclopĂŠdia article.
334:
295:
853:
736:
722:
33:
878:
169:
or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the
90:
786:
1660:
1467:"Rome Rule"; if I had I would have expanded the article. I don't believe you have found a single source that has written
1209:
1455:
have written about them, they cannot be included. Maybe they will be written about in the future, but Knowledge (XXG) is
1304:
1202:
979:
1014:
809:
772:
1622:
1308:
902:
162:
2019:
912:
1483:
1231:
As per my comments above, I have reverted factually incorrect information, and an erroneous use of a source. --
1117:
Could someone reference this? I could not be assed with it. It should be referenced, or the content removed. --
1475:
1410:
39:
1621:
I don't see why it should be deleted. There are other examples on Knowledge (XXG) of phrases being articles (
1102:
1982:
1974:
225:
431:
405:
1011:
908:
607:
1167:
928:
895:
518:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
342:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
241:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
93:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
1708:
If all that is needed to end the deletion debate is, as you say, to point to sources that have written
1924:
1296:
1032:
842:
817:
813:
1448:
972:
754:
21:
760:
502:
624:, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to the
1890:
1807:
1788:
1767:
1729:
1718:
which claimed that Home Rule would mean "Rome Rule". The Irish Nationalist leader John Redmond's
1699:
1668:
1634:
1599:
1560:
1494:
1418:
1383:
1350:
1316:
1176:
1137:
1939:
Following section was deleted on 00:37, 12 September 2011 by "24.11.168.41" on the grounds that:
885:
1844:
1829:
1751:
1649:
1331:
1251:
1236:
1221:
1152:
1122:
829:
792:
2005:(Northern Ireland's prime minister 1921â1940) proclaimed that "all I boast of is that we are
1479:
867:
166:
1955:
1904:
1863:
1779:
1714:
1246:
Ammended sentence to reflect source. Removed comment / opinion, with no supporting source --
1216:
The sentence dose simply not reflect the information the source is being used to support. --
238:
1712:"Rome Rule" then I have some examples. Studies devoted to "Rome Rule" are Joseph Hocking's
1456:
1920:
625:
1452:
891:
591:
570:
924:
709:
326:
2055:
1886:
1803:
1802:
an uncontroversial delete). Continuing the discussion here doesn't seem worthwhile. -
1784:
1763:
1725:
1720:
1695:
1664:
1630:
1595:
1556:
1490:
1414:
1379:
1371:
1346:
1312:
1172:
1133:
1071:
1037:
821:
2010:
1969:
1840:
1825:
1747:
1645:
1537:
1327:
1292:
1281:
1247:
1232:
1217:
1148:
1118:
515:
1824:
Requested AfD as this thread seems to be going nowhere let the community decide.
1341:"rome rule" - "ireland" gives more results about ancient Rome). Even Citizendium
1996:
To keep on record deleted well quoted section claimed to be devoid of context!:
1951:
1900:
1859:
1687:
1288:
920:
601:
419:
394:
1276:
in Google will produce more results about the Roman Empire than about Ireland.
846:
597:
492:
486:
465:
316:
310:
289:
215:
153:
496:
1778:
Domer48 I think your reading of history is bizarre if you believe that the
1986:
1975:
http://www.stpatrickscathedral.ie/the-state-and-saint-patricks-cathedral/
1194:
British Government, something the Fenians were also accused of causing?
1084:
reflect the law of the land, and at the time the 1937 Irish Constitution
1839:
I agree, as evident by the above discussion, it's not going anywere. --
1265:
I am proposing that this article be deleted for the following reasons:
805:
339:
1486:. When you take out those arguments, what is really left of your case?
1342:
1659:
because this division was real. To deny it is quite bizarre. Here is
916:
209:
191:
1272:"Rome Rule" on its own is not even a proper phrase. A search for
1147:
I would agree totally, and support your reasonable suggestion. --
1959:
1928:
1919:
This article has grown hugely since my last visit in April 2008.
1908:
1894:
1867:
1848:
1833:
1811:
1792:
1771:
1755:
1733:
1703:
1672:
1653:
1638:
1626:
1603:
1564:
1498:
1422:
1404:
I am not saying at all that it can't be an article. In fact, it
1387:
1354:
1335:
1320:
1255:
1240:
1225:
1180:
1156:
1141:
1126:
1106:
1074:
1040:
1022:
1199:
967:
15:
1303:
In short, the topic has not received significant coverage in
1057:
to comment that Gavan Duffy's judgement (in which he applied
861:
Category:Knowledge (XXG) requested photographs of Catholicism
1471:"Rome Rule"; if you had you would have expanded the article.
1413:. Take it to AFD if you like, but I doubt it will succeed. -
1326:
Can't argue with the above, it was simply a catch phrase. --
152:
2018:
Prof. Ronan Fanning, Professor Emeritus of Modern History (
1054:
2067:
Unknown-importance Politics of the United Kingdom articles
103:
Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom
1686:
thrust of the newspaper story. The story is about Prof.
698:
693:
688:
683:
2001:
It is all too often forgotten that immediately before
1463:
it. I haven't found a single source that has written
2077:
Unknown-importance Northern Ireland-related articles
1291:
article doesn't mention it. On the other hand, the
514:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
338:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
237:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
89:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
1295:article says that it was him that coined it, while
135:
106:
Template:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom
2044:, the Sunday Independent, Dublin, 6 December 2009.
271:This article has not yet received a rating on the
123:This article has not yet received a rating on the
1097:(1922-37) had no special position for any church.
1474:While you're reading that essay, take a look at
1367:I'm very disappointed that you would remove the
748:Category:Unknown-importance Catholicism articles
429:, a project which is currently considered to be
2062:C-Class Politics of the United Kingdom articles
2041:The age of our craven deference is finally over
1999:
441:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Unionism in Ireland
2007:a Protestant parliament and a Protestant state
8:
1977:Hard to believe now in very different times.
251:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Northern Ireland
1447:personal dislike of the subject. Now read
2097:C-Class Ireland articles of Mid-importance
717:Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
671:
565:
460:
389:
284:
186:
132:
86:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom
47:
2072:C-Class Northern Ireland-related articles
780:Category:WikiProject invitation templates
1311:of the subject i.e. it is non-notable.
1284:does have a dab page). Why should this?
875:Category:Stub-Class Catholicism articles
744:Category:Unassessed Catholicism articles
528:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Christianity
444:Template:WikiProject Unionism in Ireland
2032:
638:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Catholicism
567:
462:
391:
286:
188:
109:Politics of the United Kingdom articles
49:
19:
2082:All WikiProject Northern Ireland pages
170:
254:Template:WikiProject Northern Ireland
7:
2112:Mid-importance Christianity articles
508:This article is within the scope of
425:This article is within the scope of
332:This article is within the scope of
231:This article is within the scope of
83:This article is within the scope of
2127:Mid-importance Catholicism articles
826:American Board of Catholic Missions
352:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Ireland
38:It is of interest to the following
628:. For more information, visit the
14:
2117:WikiProject Christianity articles
531:Template:WikiProject Christianity
257:Northern Ireland-related articles
2132:WikiProject Catholicism articles
1017:
971:
778:Invitation template needed, see
708:
641:Template:WikiProject Catholicism
600:
590:
569:
495:
485:
464:
418:
393:
319:
309:
288:
218:
208:
190:
76:
62:
51:
20:
2092:Mid-importance Ireland articles
1299:says it was Randolph Churchill.
982:on 9 April 2008. The result of
978:This article was nominated for
658:This article has been rated as
548:This article has been rated as
427:WikiProject Unionism in Ireland
372:This article has been rated as
1960:10:09, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
1721:Does Home Rule mean Rome Rule?
1001:The article currently states:
879:Category:Catholic Church stubs
100:Politics of the United Kingdom
91:Politics of the United Kingdom
59:Politics of the United Kingdom
1:
2107:C-Class Christianity articles
2102:All WikiProject Ireland pages
1987:11:29, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
1075:00:55, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
1041:00:55, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
522:and see a list of open tasks.
346:and see a list of open tasks.
245:and see a list of open tasks.
97:and see a list of open tasks.
2122:C-Class Catholicism articles
447:Unionism in Ireland articles
355:Template:WikiProject Ireland
234:WikiProject Northern Ireland
1929:13:50, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
1023:20:56, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
814:Bishop Adolph John Paschang
810:Roman Catholicism in Kosovo
2148:
1909:09:48, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
1895:18:43, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
1868:15:59, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
1724:offered a contrary view.--
1127:22:41, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
1107:10:26, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
1080:The Tilson case (1948-50)
1053:I suppose it would offend
664:project's importance scale
554:project's importance scale
378:project's importance scale
273:project's importance scale
125:project's importance scale
1849:21:06, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
1834:20:52, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
1812:20:21, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
1793:18:51, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
1772:18:46, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
1756:18:06, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
1734:18:51, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
1704:16:10, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
1673:15:28, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
1654:08:02, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
1639:23:20, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
1604:13:49, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
1565:13:29, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
1532:much if it were the case.
1499:08:06, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
1423:06:02, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
1388:22:51, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
1355:13:16, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
1336:12:57, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
1321:09:11, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
1256:20:45, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
1241:20:26, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
1226:19:04, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
1181:14:21, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
1157:07:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
1142:07:33, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
913:Archbishop of Westminster
670:
657:
585:
547:
480:
413:
371:
304:
270:
203:
160:
131:
122:
71:
46:
2087:C-Class Ireland articles
1274:"rome rule" -"home rule"
943:for Catholicism articles
511:WikiProject Christianity
1964:
1715:Is Home Rule Rome Rule?
1095:Free State constitution
621:WikiProject Catholicism
618:is within the scope of
226:Northern Ireland portal
2015:
1965:Douglas Hyde's funeral
1343:has an article on this
909:Archdiocese of Glasgow
675:Catholicism task list:
608:Catholic Church portal
161:This article has been
157:
28:This article is rated
1661:one example from 1892
1168:Irish Home Rule bills
1049:Gavan Duffy judgement
929:Westminster Cathedral
896:John Aloysius Maguire
534:Christianity articles
156:
32:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
1297:Partition of Ireland
1030:It seems a complete
843:Americanism (heresy)
644:Catholicism articles
761:Blessed Virgin Mary
503:Christianity portal
438:Unionism in Ireland
401:Unionism in Ireland
335:WikiProject Ireland
163:automatically rated
1457:not a crystal ball
158:
34:content assessment
1261:Proposed deletion
1214:
1213:
994:
993:
966:
965:
962:
961:
958:
957:
954:
953:
950:
949:
818:Cum sĂŠpe accidere
793:Cuthbert Tunstall
564:
563:
560:
559:
459:
458:
455:
454:
388:
387:
384:
383:
283:
282:
279:
278:
185:
184:
181:
180:
177:
176:
136:More information:
2139:
2045:
2037:
2023:
1992:Culmination 2009
1780:Irish Volunteers
1453:reliable sources
1376:
1370:
1305:reliable sources
1200:
1066:, it was not so
1021:
975:
968:
723:Article requests
712:
705:
704:
672:
646:
645:
642:
639:
636:
610:
605:
604:
594:
587:
586:
581:
573:
566:
536:
535:
532:
529:
526:
505:
500:
499:
489:
482:
481:
476:
468:
461:
449:
448:
445:
442:
439:
422:
415:
414:
409:
397:
390:
360:
359:
358:Ireland articles
356:
353:
350:
329:
324:
323:
322:
313:
306:
305:
300:
292:
285:
259:
258:
255:
252:
249:
248:Northern Ireland
239:Northern Ireland
228:
223:
222:
221:
212:
205:
204:
198:Northern Ireland
194:
187:
172:
143:
133:
111:
110:
107:
104:
101:
80:
73:
72:
67:
66:
65:
55:
48:
31:
25:
24:
16:
2147:
2146:
2142:
2141:
2140:
2138:
2137:
2136:
2052:
2051:
2050:
2049:
2048:
2038:
2034:
2025:
2017:
1994:
1967:
1937:
1935:Reflection 2011
1822:
1484:WP:ALLORNOTHING
1374:
1368:
1263:
1191:
1115:
1051:
999:
997:Ethical matters
946:
703:
643:
640:
637:
634:
633:
626:Catholic Church
606:
599:
579:
533:
530:
527:
524:
523:
501:
494:
474:
446:
443:
440:
437:
436:
403:
357:
354:
351:
348:
347:
325:
320:
318:
298:
256:
253:
250:
247:
246:
224:
219:
217:
141:
108:
105:
102:
99:
98:
61:
29:
12:
11:
5:
2145:
2143:
2135:
2134:
2129:
2124:
2119:
2114:
2109:
2104:
2099:
2094:
2089:
2084:
2079:
2074:
2069:
2064:
2054:
2053:
2047:
2046:
2031:
2030:
2026:
1998:
1993:
1990:
1966:
1963:
1940:
1936:
1933:
1932:
1931:
1917:
1916:
1915:
1914:
1913:
1912:
1911:
1873:
1872:
1871:
1870:
1852:
1851:
1821:
1818:
1817:
1816:
1815:
1814:
1796:
1795:
1775:
1774:
1743:
1742:
1741:
1740:
1739:
1738:
1737:
1736:
1678:
1677:
1676:
1675:
1619:
1618:
1617:
1616:
1615:
1614:
1613:
1612:
1611:
1610:
1609:
1608:
1607:
1606:
1578:
1577:
1576:
1575:
1574:
1573:
1572:
1571:
1570:
1569:
1568:
1567:
1548:
1547:
1546:
1542:
1533:
1529:
1510:
1509:
1508:
1507:
1506:
1505:
1504:
1503:
1502:
1501:
1487:
1476:WP:INTERESTING
1472:
1432:
1431:
1430:
1429:
1428:
1427:
1426:
1425:
1411:WP:IDONTLIKEIT
1395:
1394:
1393:
1392:
1391:
1390:
1360:
1359:
1358:
1357:
1301:
1300:
1285:
1277:
1270:
1262:
1259:
1244:
1243:
1212:
1211:
1208:
1204:
1197:
1190:
1187:
1186:
1185:
1184:
1183:
1160:
1159:
1114:
1111:
1110:
1109:
1050:
1047:
1046:
1045:
1044:
1043:
1007:
1006:
998:
995:
992:
991:
984:the discussion
976:
964:
963:
960:
959:
956:
955:
952:
951:
948:
947:
945:
944:
941:recent changes
931:
925:Sanctification
898:
881:
863:
849:
832:
830:Bernard HĂ€ring
795:
782:
768:
750:
732:
730:Draft articles
716:
714:
713:
702:
701:
696:
691:
686:
680:
677:
676:
668:
667:
660:Mid-importance
656:
650:
649:
647:
612:
611:
595:
583:
582:
580:Midâimportance
574:
562:
561:
558:
557:
550:Mid-importance
546:
540:
539:
537:
520:the discussion
507:
506:
490:
478:
477:
475:Midâimportance
469:
457:
456:
453:
452:
450:
423:
411:
410:
398:
386:
385:
382:
381:
374:Mid-importance
370:
364:
363:
361:
344:the discussion
331:
330:
327:Ireland portal
314:
302:
301:
299:Midâimportance
293:
281:
280:
277:
276:
269:
263:
262:
260:
243:the discussion
230:
229:
213:
201:
200:
195:
183:
182:
179:
178:
175:
174:
159:
149:
148:
146:
144:
138:
137:
129:
128:
121:
115:
114:
112:
95:the discussion
81:
69:
68:
56:
44:
43:
37:
26:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2144:
2133:
2130:
2128:
2125:
2123:
2120:
2118:
2115:
2113:
2110:
2108:
2105:
2103:
2100:
2098:
2095:
2093:
2090:
2088:
2085:
2083:
2080:
2078:
2075:
2073:
2070:
2068:
2065:
2063:
2060:
2059:
2057:
2043:
2042:
2036:
2033:
2029:
2024:
2021:
2014:
2012:
2008:
2004:
1997:
1991:
1989:
1988:
1984:
1980:
1976:
1971:
1962:
1961:
1957:
1953:
1948:
1944:
1943:
1934:
1930:
1926:
1922:
1918:
1910:
1906:
1902:
1898:
1897:
1896:
1892:
1888:
1884:
1879:
1878:
1877:
1876:
1875:
1874:
1869:
1865:
1861:
1856:
1855:
1854:
1853:
1850:
1846:
1842:
1838:
1837:
1836:
1835:
1831:
1827:
1819:
1813:
1809:
1805:
1800:
1799:
1798:
1797:
1794:
1790:
1786:
1781:
1777:
1776:
1773:
1769:
1765:
1760:
1759:
1758:
1757:
1753:
1749:
1735:
1731:
1727:
1723:
1722:
1717:
1716:
1711:
1707:
1706:
1705:
1701:
1697:
1693:
1689:
1684:
1683:
1682:
1681:
1680:
1679:
1674:
1670:
1666:
1662:
1657:
1656:
1655:
1651:
1647:
1643:
1642:
1641:
1640:
1636:
1632:
1628:
1624:
1605:
1601:
1597:
1592:
1591:
1590:
1589:
1588:
1587:
1586:
1585:
1584:
1583:
1582:
1581:
1580:
1579:
1566:
1562:
1558:
1554:
1549:
1543:
1539:
1534:
1530:
1526:
1525:
1522:
1521:
1520:
1519:
1518:
1517:
1516:
1515:
1514:
1513:
1512:
1511:
1500:
1496:
1492:
1488:
1485:
1481:
1477:
1473:
1470:
1466:
1462:
1458:
1454:
1450:
1446:
1442:
1441:
1440:
1439:
1438:
1437:
1436:
1435:
1434:
1433:
1424:
1420:
1416:
1412:
1407:
1403:
1402:
1401:
1400:
1399:
1398:
1397:
1396:
1389:
1385:
1381:
1373:
1366:
1365:
1364:
1363:
1362:
1361:
1356:
1352:
1348:
1344:
1339:
1338:
1337:
1333:
1329:
1325:
1324:
1323:
1322:
1318:
1314:
1310:
1306:
1298:
1294:
1290:
1286:
1283:
1278:
1275:
1271:
1268:
1267:
1266:
1260:
1258:
1257:
1253:
1249:
1242:
1238:
1234:
1230:
1229:
1228:
1227:
1223:
1219:
1205:
1201:
1198:
1195:
1188:
1182:
1178:
1174:
1169:
1164:
1163:
1162:
1161:
1158:
1154:
1150:
1146:
1145:
1144:
1143:
1139:
1135:
1129:
1128:
1124:
1120:
1112:
1108:
1104:
1100:
1099:86.42.205.205
1096:
1092:
1091:5th Amendment
1087:
1083:
1079:
1078:
1077:
1076:
1073:
1069:
1065:
1060:
1056:
1048:
1042:
1039:
1035:
1034:
1029:
1028:
1027:
1026:
1025:
1024:
1020:
1016:
1013:
1004:
1003:
1002:
996:
989:
985:
981:
977:
974:
970:
969:
942:
938:
936:
932:
930:
926:
922:
918:
914:
910:
907:
905:
904:
899:
897:
893:
890:
888:
887:
882:
880:
876:
872:
870:
869:
864:
862:
858:
856:
855:
850:
848:
844:
841:
839:
838:
833:
831:
827:
823:
822:Altar Society
819:
815:
811:
807:
804:
802:
801:
796:
794:
791:
789:
788:
783:
781:
777:
775:
774:
769:
766:
762:
759:
757:
756:
751:
749:
745:
741:
739:
738:
733:
731:
727:
725:
724:
719:
718:
715:
711:
707:
706:
700:
697:
695:
692:
690:
687:
685:
682:
681:
679:
678:
674:
673:
669:
665:
661:
655:
652:
651:
648:
631:
627:
623:
622:
617:
616:
609:
603:
598:
596:
593:
589:
588:
584:
578:
575:
572:
568:
555:
551:
545:
542:
541:
538:
521:
517:
513:
512:
504:
498:
493:
491:
488:
484:
483:
479:
473:
470:
467:
463:
451:
434:
433:
428:
424:
421:
417:
416:
412:
407:
402:
399:
396:
392:
379:
375:
369:
366:
365:
362:
345:
341:
337:
336:
328:
317:
315:
312:
308:
307:
303:
297:
294:
291:
287:
274:
268:
265:
264:
261:
244:
240:
236:
235:
227:
216:
214:
211:
207:
206:
202:
199:
196:
193:
189:
168:
164:
155:
151:
150:
147:
145:
140:
139:
134:
130:
126:
120:
117:
116:
113:
96:
92:
88:
87:
82:
79:
75:
74:
70:
60:
57:
54:
50:
45:
41:
35:
27:
23:
18:
17:
2040:
2035:
2027:
2016:
2011:Pat Rabbitte
2000:
1995:
1979:78.17.61.105
1970:Douglas Hyde
1968:
1949:
1945:
1941:
1938:
1882:
1823:
1744:
1719:
1713:
1709:
1691:
1620:
1552:
1538:No surrender
1468:
1464:
1460:
1444:
1405:
1302:
1293:John Tyndall
1282:No Surrender
1264:
1245:
1215:
1196:
1192:
1130:
1116:
1085:
1081:
1067:
1063:
1058:
1052:
1033:Non sequitur
1031:
1008:
1000:
987:
934:
933:
901:
900:
884:
883:
866:
865:
852:
851:
835:
834:
798:
797:
785:
784:
771:
770:
753:
752:
735:
734:
721:
720:
659:
630:project page
619:
614:
613:
549:
525:Christianity
516:Christianity
509:
472:Christianity
430:
373:
333:
232:
84:
40:WikiProjects
2003:James Craig
1688:A. V. Dicey
1545:individual.
1528:sufficient.
1309:independent
1289:John Bright
921:Saint Mungo
892:Peer review
773:Collaborate
635:Catholicism
577:Catholicism
2056:Categories
2028:References
1921:Red Hurley
1449:WP:ILIKEIT
847:Ensoulment
173:parameter.
1885:be one.
1307:that are
1189:Rome Rule
1113:Reference
1059:Ne Temere
1015:Latin1968
765:talk page
763:(see the
615:Rome Rule
1887:Scolaire
1804:R. fiend
1785:Johnbull
1764:R. fiend
1726:Johnbull
1696:Scolaire
1665:Johnbull
1631:Johnbull
1596:Scolaire
1557:R. fiend
1491:Scolaire
1415:R. fiend
1380:Scolaire
1347:R. fiend
1313:Scolaire
1173:R. fiend
1134:Scolaire
1072:Red King
1064:de facto
1038:Red King
1012:Quartier
980:deletion
787:Copyedit
1841:Domer48
1826:BigDunc
1748:Domer48
1646:Domer48
1480:WP:LOSE
1328:Domer48
1248:Domer48
1233:Domer48
1218:Domer48
1149:Domer48
1119:Domer48
1068:de jure
806:Angelus
755:Cleanup
689:history
662:on the
552:on the
432:defunct
406:defunct
376:on the
349:Ireland
340:Ireland
296:Ireland
30:C-class
1952:Osioni
1901:Osioni
1883:should
1860:Osioni
939:Watch
917:Bishop
903:Verify
886:Update
800:Expand
737:Assess
171:|auto=
36:scale.
1710:about
1692:about
1469:about
1465:about
1461:about
1070:. --
935:Other
868:Stubs
854:Photo
699:purge
694:watch
165:by a
1983:talk
1956:talk
1925:talk
1905:talk
1891:talk
1864:talk
1845:talk
1830:talk
1808:talk
1789:talk
1768:talk
1752:talk
1730:talk
1700:talk
1669:talk
1650:talk
1635:talk
1627:here
1625:and
1623:here
1600:talk
1561:talk
1495:talk
1482:and
1419:talk
1384:talk
1372:prod
1351:talk
1332:talk
1317:talk
1252:talk
1237:talk
1222:talk
1177:talk
1153:talk
1138:talk
1123:talk
1103:talk
988:keep
986:was
873:see
859:see
837:NPOV
742:see
728:see
684:edit
2020:UCD
1820:AfD
1445:any
1345:. -
1086:did
1082:did
1055:NOR
654:Mid
544:Mid
368:Mid
267:???
167:bot
119:???
2058::
1985:)
1958:)
1927:)
1907:)
1893:)
1866:)
1847:)
1832:)
1810:)
1791:)
1770:)
1754:)
1732:)
1702:)
1671:)
1652:)
1637:)
1602:)
1563:)
1553:is
1497:)
1478:,
1421:)
1406:is
1386:)
1375:}}
1369:{{
1353:)
1334:)
1319:)
1254:)
1239:)
1224:)
1210:â
1203:â
1179:)
1155:)
1140:)
1125:)
1105:)
927:;
923:;
919:;
915:;
911:;
894:;
877:;
845:;
828:;
824:;
820:;
816:;
812:;
808:;
746:;
142:/
2022:)
1981:(
1954:(
1923:(
1903:(
1889:(
1862:(
1843:(
1828:(
1806:(
1787:(
1766:(
1750:(
1728:(
1698:(
1667:(
1648:(
1633:(
1598:(
1559:(
1493:(
1417:(
1382:(
1349:(
1330:(
1315:(
1250:(
1235:(
1220:(
1175:(
1171:-
1151:(
1136:(
1121:(
1101:(
990:.
937::
906::
889::
871::
857::
840::
803::
790::
776::
767:)
758::
740::
726::
666:.
632:.
556:.
435:.
408:)
404:(
380:.
275:.
127:.
42::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
