Talk:Michael McKevitt

Comments

It's great that there is a source of the printed word such as an encyclopedia on the Web, that is free.However,it is not free if the information it imparts is one sided and presents only the view of special interest groups such as the American FBI,CIA, MI5,and so on. It has not been proven that Michael McKevitt did anything.His trial has been influenced by the sources I mentioned, and the news media in this country, occupied Ireland, and Britain.As to the irish Republican Army,they killed only 70 people(proven) whereas the amount of people killed by loyalist terror groups at the behest of the British government has been staggering.

Why now have your pages been protected, when not long ago anyone could edit or insert material;do you really not want to hear other,and perhaps more realistic discussions of the same material? It is interesting,considering all the current frenzy about "terrorists" in the world today, that anyone acting for a military organ- ization not in uniform and unrecognized is a terrorist;that also includes the Palestinians,who have been forced into a corner and threatened with extermination merely because the Zionists in Israel(notice that I did not say all Israelis,or all Jews) want them out of the picture. The loyalists in occupied Ireland have been allowed to do as they please by the British government,so that ireland will remain unfree. You may remember,the Irish Republican Army has been working for peace for some time.One hopes the rest of the world does not expect them to submit themselves to extermination merely because others want them dead or in prison.

---

The attempts, reflected by the rather ludicrously simplistic analysis of Irish history above (which is to history what Mickey Mouse is to the study of mice), to turn this article into poorly written, factually inaccurate propaganda, was the reason for the edit war which led to the page being protected. Various users were involved in reverting the rubbish, which seemed intent on turning an encyclopædic article into a Real IRA polemical press release. Among the anonymous user's attempts at the propagandisation of the article are

• using such encyclopædic language as FBI stooge in place of the NPOV reference "FBI agent",
• adding in this means very little,considering that Gerry Adams is known to have been paid off by special interest groups,including the American CIA and British MI5.. about Gerry Adams,
• to the sentence "which has been regarded as responsible for the Omagh bombing in the late 1990s, which killed 29 people;" the anonymous user inserted however,it should be noted that this is the view of the British media and MI5,not reality.
• the insertion of a pro-Real IRA poem that not merely breaches NPOV but also breaches copyright.

The user has repeatedly returned to this page (and others) to propagandise them, using various IPs. As there was no one IP that could be blocked, and blocking the range would have been unfair to others using them, it was decided to protect the page until there was some evidence that the anonymous user stopped POVing it and breaching copyright. As the comments he wrote earlier show, he still wants to agendaise the page, add in slanderous comment and introduce gross factual inaccuracies that even members of the Real IRA privately would roll their eyes over. FearÉIREANN 20:25, 29 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I removed reference to Bobby Sands being a Sinn Fein MP as he didnt stand for Sinn Fein. AlanMc

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 23:51, 27 August 2007 (UTC) Birthplace.It's my understanding that Michael was born and raised in Dundalk,yet the article just states Co.Louth.Wjeanne (talk) 16:28, 15 April 2008 (UTC)hy is this?

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Michael McKevitt. 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/20060220140903/http://www.newrepublicanforum.ie/ to http://www.newrepublicanforum.ie/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070226114919/http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20030625/ai_n12697913 to http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20030625/ai_n12697913

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) 16:36, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Michael McKevitt. 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/20070517203539/http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1117102002 to http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1117102002
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060902143451/http://library.nps.navy.mil/home/tgp/rira.htm to http://library.nps.navy.mil/home/tgp/rira.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20031014192230/http://usembassy.state.gov/tokyo/wwwh20030514c2.html to http://usembassy.state.gov/tokyo/wwwh20030514c2.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) 12:48, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Criminal cats

No policy or guideline says that people convicted of serious crimes shouldn't be in criminal cats. A little-seen discussion, with few contributors, on the talk page of a bio of a convicted criminal of the same ideology, doesn't create a consensus to omit such cats from bios based on their motivation for committing their crimes. Including such cats is correct & relevant & is certainly not tendentious. Rarely does anyone remove criminal cats from bios of terrorists of other ideologies. Jim Michael (talk) 12:10, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

The policy called consensus says they shouldn't. Consensus at Talk:Bobby Sands#Category additions reverted again and the previous discussions linked to in that discussion (which were far more than A little-seen discussion, with few contributors). This article is already in two relevant categories, Category:Irish republicans imprisoned by non-jury courts and Category:Irish republicans imprisoned on charges of terrorism. FDW777 (talk) 13:33, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion/Archive 9#Proposed solution to categorising those imprisoned during The Troubles, since you seek to deny the existence of said discussion. FDW777 (talk) 13:36, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

A few editors on a few articles in a few discussions don't create a WP-wide consensus. That 2007 discussion didn't reach a conclusion to not put people convicted of any type of crime in criminal cats. McKevitt should be in Category:21st-century Irish criminals, Category:Criminals from County Louth (if created) & Category:Irish male criminals. None of those are subcats of cats currently on the article, nor vice versa. His convictions were for serious crimes & he was imprisoned for many years for them. Furthermore, those crimes were central to his notability - it's nothing like someone having been an occasional petty thief when they were a teenager which had nothing to do with their subsequent notable career. You insist that Edward O'Brien - who is known solely for having been the Aldwych bus bomber - not be categorised as a criminal. If a few editors tried to push for ISIL members to no longer be classified as criminals, there's no chance they'd succeed. We obviously shouldn't exclude one type of criminal from criminal cats on the basis of their ideology, location or conflict. To do so would be to be strongly biased in their favour, thereby violating our neutrality policy as well as implying that their crimes were justified. Jim Michael (talk) 09:53, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

I refer you to @Scolaire:'s comment of Agreed. Jim Michael is fond of saying there is no policy or guideline to prevent him from adding the cat. Well, WP:Consensus is a policy. A consensus was arrived at many years ago not to categorise these people as criminals, and Jim Michael has failed to achieve a consensus for doing so now. I also refer you to my suggestion that you start with the poster boy for people with convictions for politically motivated offences, Nelson Mandela. Why don't you see if you can gain consensus to categorise him as a criminal? FDW777 (talk) 19:30, 4 January 2021 (UTC)