Talk:Gort

Pronunciation of Gort

The Irish Times, that bastion of Gaelicism, complained on Saturday about people pronouncing Gort to rhyme with hurt and advised "try rhyming it with DART". Now, in Munster Irish, gort more-or-less rhymes with (the English word) hurt: is this also true in Connacht Irish? If so, is the IT wrong? Or is the accepted English pronunciation different from the Irish? In which case, does it really rhyme with dart, cart, mart? Or with wart, sort? Or (for those without the horse-hoarse merger) with port, court? The DART bit looks like a (possibly ironic) bit of Dortspeak. jnestorius^(talk) 15:45, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

It rhymes with DART if pronunced proprtly. There's a gurreral art on the accent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.253.13 (talk) 20:24, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Rhyming with DART makes no sense at all. How strangulated Donnybrook would you have to be to come up with that one! My fur hur indeed. Well the Galway (city) pronunciation version is somewhere between hu-rt and go-rt, certainly not ga-rt. [Note for English readers, the R is not elided as it would be in English English - i.e., it is gorrt rather than gawt]. --Red King (talk) 20:53, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Ofiachain (talk) 02:58, 25 January 2009 (UTC): Yes, the town name Gort rhymes with "sort" (I live there :). jnestorius is right that the Irish language word gort (meaning "field" or "meadow") does rhyme, more-or-less, with "hurt" and I believe that's why the town gets called "Gurt" on TV and radio on a regular basis. But locals do find that very annoying, so I'm glad to see the IT was trying to do the right thing. But yes DART as a rhyme for "sort" or "Gort" is very D4...

2011 Census & Brazilian population?

Does anybody have an update for the article in this regard? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.123.137.71 (talk) 17:52, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

1. Sweg xoxoxo — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.40.17.218 (talk) 10:40, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gort. 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/20110607074609/http://www.cso.ie/census/documents/census2006_volume_1_pop_classified_by_area.pdf to http://www.cso.ie/census/documents/census2006_volume_1_pop_classified_by_area.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120217095720/http://www.nisranew.nisra.gov.uk/census to http://www.nisranew.nisra.gov.uk/census

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 10:59, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

The Day the Earth Stood Still

Gort was the name of the robot in the movie The Day The Earth Stood Still. Curious that Wikipedia doesn't have an entry for Gort that covers that. SoftwareThing (talk) 18:13, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

I fail to see how mentioning this (if true that it was named for Gort, Galway) is relevant to this article. ProfPixels (talk) 16:59, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Do you have any evidence of this, SoftwareThing? The Banner talk 17:04, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Yes, it's noted on Wikipedia already: Gort (The Day the Earth Stood Still) SoftwareThing (talk) 16:03, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

You have to point it out to me, as I can not find it. The Banner talk 17:30, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Places of Interest

Places of interest should be reasonably close to Gort, not three villages further. The Cusack centre is in Carron. The Burren National Park is near Kilnaboy/Corofin. Not at all close to Gort. The Banner talk 23:19, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Part of Gort's importance, history, and interest are the things near it. It is geologically part of the Burren and neighbours smaller parishes and villages, serving as a centre for the region. I think the additions of what is near Gort, even crossing imaginary county lines, as well as what is in Gort helps understand the geographic and historical significance of the town. I think listing regional sites of interest, with a short description helps do this in an encyclopaedic way. The only question here is how to define 'Nearby' (which is only being put forward in opinion form "not at all nearby" at present). I'd say 30 km, 30 minutes is a safe bet. Hardly understand why this should be controversial. Fully support keeping as much information on here that enhances the article. Regards, Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 23:39, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

That is the essential "near it", not many kilometres away. Kilmacduagh, mwah. But Dungaire Castle in Kinvara, the Cusack Centre in Carran or the Burren National park near Corofin/Kilnaboy are not at all close to Gort. Are you going to claim that Bunratty is closeby Gort? The Banner talk 23:53, 1 November 2022 (UTC) Yes, I live fairly local but not close to Gort, the other (southern edge) side of The Burren.

Kilmacduagh and Coole are in Gort, which is why we aren't debating that. As for Nearby... I've offered a rationale as to regional significance, and a definition of what might constitute nearby. And yes, nearby, as a distance, can be defined by kilometres or by minutes. I'm drawing a circle around the largest town in the area... so the onyl question can be how big is that circle. Peterswell and Boston are nearby, as they are neighbouring villages, but Corofin and Loughrea are as well, as the next sizable towns. Isn't this all useful regional context for someone who may know nothing about Gort? Why are you having such a hard time with this 'Nearby' word or the inclusion in an article, which only benefit it? Why the bee in your bonnet? And just to address your apparent bias in your choice of screen name... This really isn't the place for regionalist quarrels. Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 00:03, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tourist guide. And you are trying to fancy up the article by adding non-local places of interest to it. Concentrate on the town, there is plenty more there worth mentioning and sourcing. The secondary school needs some sources. A bit about the amenities, for example, is also useful. The GAA or the rugby club are not even mentioned in the article. The reopening of the rail station is also worth a source, as is the motorway. Etc. etc. In stead, you are edit warring about places half an hour drive away. The Banner talk 00:18, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

I agree the article can be improved and that it shouldn't read like a tourist brochure. But I don't think it does read that way. Having said that, you removing relevant information in an edit war you began without discussion or even defining the parameters to is simply non constructive and vandalism. The edits should remain until this is resolved on talk. You've reverted edits now 5 times and you maintain your opinion about relevance, which is not fact based. Please provide examples of why including nearby historical information isn't pertinent. My thinking is that Gort's significance and history has a lot to do with the region its in and has historical connections to. As an example, Dunguaire Castle was one of Guaire's homes, as was Gort and that dates back some 1400 years. To say the proximity today isn't to your liking is fairly absurd. Regards Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 11:40, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

You kept reverting even after I started the discussion. You ignored my reasoning that places 30 minutes driving away are not close by. And you are making the article into a tourist guide for no apparent reason then your own preference. As you stated: where do you draw the line? With your "half an hour driving"-limit everything in Ennis and Galway can be added. That is not a good idea. The Banner talk 19:55, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

All the information I am adding is reliable and cited. Please see Template:Article templates/City for the standard. There is nothing controversial about the improvements I am making to this article. Regards, Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 21:21, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi both. I made a few edits to the article before spotting this related discussion. I have removed the entries on Dunguaire Castle and Slieve Aughty. The latter being 20km or more away. I also note that neither has a cited connection to the subject of this article. (I also can't disagree with the suggestion that the tone is creeping towards non-neutral. )Guliolopez (talk) 22:42, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Dunguaire Castle is already reinserted. The Banner talk 23:03, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Dunguaire Castle was the other residence of King Guaire. His other Castle was in Gort. Gort Inse Guaire. Please read the article on Dunguaire and look at what the sources say. It is a regional attraction. I see nothing controversial about including nearby and reated sites. No one has been able to provide a reason or precedent why this is not acceptable. Nor has a set distance or time been given or cited. Shannon Airport for example is the nearest airport. If someone wanted to know how to get to Gort how is that not relevant information? To say something is in another county is totally arbitrary for a border town. To suggest this or that thing is the 'property' of another place, village or parish is absurd. I'm trying to add interesting and provably true information about the town. And yes, I am drawing from my experience, that too is permitted. P.S. the hills of the Burren and the Slieve Aughty are visible from the town of Gort with the naked eye, not sure why that needs a citation. P.P.S. Dunguaire Castle is discussed in the Gort Inse Guaire: A Journey Through Time book in the chapter 'Generous Guaire'. The Burren and Slieve Augthy are mentioned in the first chapter 'Gateway to the Burren'. Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 23:30, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

I have ordered that book too. And yes, from the bridge over the M18 you can see some hills in the wider The Burren but not the hills of the Burren National Park. The Banner talk 00:34, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi all. In terms of the "places of interest" section (and the touristy/promo stuff in general) I would note that, on the:

• images, MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE expects that images be significant and relevant to the topic. And illustrative of the subject. And not decorative. The same guideline also couches against having too many images. Especially if they are more decorative than illustrative or informative. Personally, in the context of these guidelines, I do not see that a "generic" image of the Burren (taken some distance away from the town) should be in an article about the town. Especially when we are not short of images. Five images in that section alone. So many that can't even "fit" in the section.
• tone, MOS:FLOWERY/WP:SUBJECTIVE/WP:NPOV all cover the voice we are expected to use. And advise against unnecessary adjectives, subjective editorial and expressions of opinion or relativity. While I've already removed the worst examples, it would not be an improvement if things like the following find their way back: "numerous trails" (when "walking trails" suffices), "noted sculptor" (when "sculptor" is NPOV), "noted hurler" (when "inter-county hurler" is factual), very strong (when "strong" suffices), and "active market town" (when the subjective/editorial adjective adds nothing at all). If we find ourselves using these flourishes, it's good practice to ask why we feel they are needed.
• closest airports, WP:NOTGUIDEBOOK applies here. While now removed, the distance to Shannon airport seemed especially "touristic" in tone. Wikivoyage remains the correct project for that kind of "how to get here" type stuff. (Otherwise, while WP:CITSTRUCT remains a guideline for how to layout an article, it isn't a "target" template. Requiring that every section exist or be filled. If a settlement doesn't have an airport, there doesn't need to be an airport section.)
• links, to my eye the ELs seem a bit excessive. Bordering on WP:LINKFARM. And not helping with the promotional concerns.

My two cents anyway. FWIW. Guliolopez (talk) 13:58, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

I think the article is in much better shape tbh, so what is happening here is productive. Points taken on unnecessary adjectives, just writing in a style I would use everyday, and not opposed to improving that. In terms of a touristy tone, that isn't intentional, I happen to think Gort and its history is unique and fascinating and am unabashedly trying to convey that in a factual way. Again, not opposed to constructive improvements and expanding it further. In terms of relation to the Burren, I have provided some geological information and used sources which confirm that connection. Geology doesn't stop neatly at county or township lines despite what the County Councils want... And if visibility matters, the Burren hills are visible from numerous locations in the town, views exist from apartments and houses, and all along the Ennis Road. Maps of the Burren usually define its far boundries as Fanore, Lisdoonvarna, Corafin, Gort, and Kinvara. Here's one. There is also a large area of Burren 'limestone pavement' in County Galway which makes up the area between Kinvara and Gort. The Burren article seems to agree and offers some other sources.Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 14:30, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Re: Burren image. I am working with the free images on Wikimedia Commons. I agree they aren't perfect examples, but as it is a unique landscape that is hard to describe, I feel 'a picture is worth a thousand words'. Again, it is an essential historical, geological, and contemporary part of the Gort district. Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 14:35, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

• Actually places of interest should only be in Gort, if they're elsewhere they can be covered by the elsewhere's articles. We're an encyclopaedic, not a tourist guide. Everything in the article needs to be relevant and about the article subject, not about and relevant to another locale. Canterbury Tail talk 22:11, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

  Can you provide examples of this or a style reference? I noted Ballyvaughan includes the Poulnabrone Dolmen, and correctly so. The question keeps coming down to local territorial claims that a site 'belongs' to one parish, township, or county or another. My logic is this is far too localised and not particularly helpful in describing a place historically or contemporarily. There will be overlap and that makes sense... Corafin can be on the boundary of the Burren as can Kinvara and Gort (sources back that up as well). There is nothing 'touristy' about acknowledging these closely situated sites have interrelationships... My thinking is that neighbouring and related sites aid in understanding a place, thus adding knowledge, the point of an encyclopedia. The other articles you mentioned are linked for readers to explore. The proposed solution would be basically to draw a circle around an area and put a limit on that in terms of driving time or distance. I'm open to other suggestions. But to limit the article to the township boundaries which date back to some previous centuries seems fairly ridiculous (e.g. removing Thoor Ballylee, Coole, and Kilmacduagh is just strange and tbh pretty controversial.) Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 13:26, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

  The 'blog' removed from the External links and reinstated is the current official site for the Gort River Walk organisation. No reason to remove. Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 13:31, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

  Historically, Gort was the centre of the Barony of Kiltartan, and it isn't difficult to understand that Gort remains a capital for this region today with people traveling 30-40 minutes from neighbouring villages to attend to daily and weekly services they need in a proper town with banks, mechanics, grocery stores, etc. Gort is comprised of numerous parishes (pg 19), with the Gort parish being only one small one comprising the greater parish, area and modern town. The current electoral district provides a different view as well. There are other examples and all reflect the complex and long history of Ireland itself. There are clearly several ways to interpret what constitutes Gort, so that needs to be decided before shooting down places of interest. So, my thinking is it's important to include all of this, as it is all valid and factual... and to stay away from one local's opinion over another. Last thought: why or who does it hurt to include a 'full scope' approach? Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 13:55, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

  This has already been explained to you by several editors? We're an encyclopedia, not a tourist guide, and places several kilometres away - especially ones several kilometres away - are not proper to this article. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 14:12, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

  Also you reinstated two links that aren't suitable links. One is for a topic that already has its own article, the link is appropriate there. The other is a blog for a river walk, how is that in any way encyclopaedic? We're an encyclopaedia, not a travel guide. And also the onus is on the editor adding to the article to get consensus for the inclusion of that material, you do not edit war to put it back in without discussion, and you do not reinsert it while a discussion is ongoing. You've been here a long time, you know the cycle and pattern of editing you're Bold, if you're Reverted then you Discuss. You do not put the edit back, it is not a status quo to include the contested material while a discussion is underway unless it's been there for a very long time. Canterbury Tail talk 14:36, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

  I have reverted the addition as pov-pushing and as advertising. The Banner talk 14:48, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

  The River Walk is in the town proper and is an award winning and newsworthy 1, 2, 3 part of the town. I can see people are offering personal opinions about how including anything near the town is considered touristy, I've repeatedly offered cited reasons why these are relevant, and most importantly I don't see a) a definition of "nearby" or what consititutes a local amenity, or b) even what constitutes the town itself, as I previously wrote with sources. What is clear is there isn't a clear standard on this, so there cannot be clear enforcement. Touristy also doesn't have a clear definition in this discussion. I could honestly understand if I was using words like: stunning, beautiful, breath taking and listing hotels and restaurants. I have not done that. What I am listing are things people do here – local, immigrant, and visitor alike – that connect to the history of the town... and I'm supporting that with sources. Again, if anyone wants to respond to the very encylopeadic idea of spreading knowledge about a place includes it's immediate area and what people in the town enjoy, or use, or why they move there in the first place... try having a close read and check the facts. If you disagree, respond with facts. And saying a place has its own article so therefore cannot be linked by another article is simply conterproductive. I will continue to include provable information. Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 17:44, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

  @The Banner My edits don't meet definition of WP:PROMOTION. However, and just to note, having a screen name that promotes something is. ;-) Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 18:11, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

  Your edits are POV, PROMO and WP:IDIDNOTHEARTHAT. You ignore all reasoning from multiple people, just to get your stuff in. That is plain pov-pushing. The Banner talk 23:34, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

  Canterbury Tail You're jumping into a discussion and contentiously removing sourced material. That is, even by your own definition, edit warring.

  • WP:POTKETTLE Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 17:52, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

  Um no, I randomly came across an article and noticed it wasn't encyclopaedic so removed that unencyclopaedic content. It wasn't until after I did so that I noticed the history and headed to the talk page. Additionally, I only made one set of edits and I wasn't even aware at the time it was a reversion of recently added material just material that shouldn't be there. Canterbury Tail talk 18:36, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

  @Canterbury Tail ...and I saw a reversion on a current discussion and asked that you take it to Talk. Are we done somewhat pointlessly summarising? Can we stick to sources and facts and respond to information presented? Cheers, Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 18:47, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

  @Bastun Can you show me where in some style guide we are not permitted to include things "several kilometers away"? Aren't the Gort GAA pitch or Golf Club "several kilometers away"? Serious question, can you tell me just how many kilometers away constitutes a place of interest to a town? Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 18:07, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

  If they have Gort in the name, and if they're relevant, then fair enough. If they're 20km away, then nope, not so much! Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 14:22, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

  This would need some sort of citation or reference to support what your saying. I think you know that. Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 14:53, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Having said that, I see in WP:CITYSTRUCT (thanks Guliolopez for the correct template) that a section on attractions may have "Museums and other points of interest, parks (local, regional, provincial parks), recreation venues, pubs, restaurants, etc Sometimes may be termed Landmarks, or Points of interest or may be included in a Culture / Arts and culture section; perhaps under a subsection such as Tourism, Museums, or Pubs." Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 19:21, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

WP:CITYSTRUCT: This reference is a supplement to specific guidelines on writing about U.K. cities and towns, U.S. cities, Canadian cities, Philippine cities and municipalities, and Indian cities. It has no influence on Irish villages/towns. The Banner talk 14:31, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

@Guliolopez Care to comment on this? (I'd call it WP:BF). Or the repeated edit warring by @The Banner? This user seems to have a track record of stubborn and unconstructive reversions and conflicts. I believe this matter should be closed based on the evidence presented in this section of talk. I also think the article is noticeably improved and has improved sources. So, the petty commenting on my talk page, the false warnings, the fairly surface engagement with sourced information, and unsourced editing can be viewed for what it is... WP:VANDALIZE. Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 14:52, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Hiya. I'm not sure who you're accusing of vandalising. But I don't see any vandalism. What I see, given that you asked for my comment, is an editor who has received input/recommendations from several other editors (myself, The Banner [whether you agree with the tone or not] and Canterbury Tail). All of whom have, in one form or another, cautioned against having too much overtly "tourism brochure" content and tone. And then, despite that, you've effectively quoted/copy/pasted content directly from a tourist brochure. With an edit summary that suggests that there was a talk page discussion/consensus (involving me or others) that supported this. When there wasn't. Or implying that WP:CITYSTRUCT supports inclusion of an extended tourism section covering stuff in a much broader hinterland. When it doesn't really. This is undoubtedly not the "comment" you wanted. But, frankly, The Banner's comments (about WP:IDIDNOTHEARTHAT) resonate more with me than your own comments (about perceived vandalism). Otherwise, my own comment is that everyone should remember WP:BATTLEGROUND. Guliolopez (talk) 15:25, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

@Guliolopez I addressed you about the claim that the style guide you provided "has no influence on Irish towns/villages". You also are the only editor making constructive and sourced edits, and reading through other peoples sources, checking them, etc. Re: tourism, personally I don't want that section, I previously argued in favour of regional attractions and then defining what qualifies as a region. No on has been able to provide solid proof one way or the other... rather only an opinion that 'that's too far' or 'that's ok'. You provided a concrete response with the style guide, so I understood the matter to be closed. I proceeded to add verifiable information by rewriting in a generalised way the contents of 2 prominent sites. I tried to fill out a section on tourism as best I could because the shoe seemed to fit. If I had it my way I'd stick to the original idea of including nearby sites as defined by a radius around the town, but no one has anything more than personal opinions on it (one: 20 km or 12 miles is out of range, another: 5km is.. no one is saying what is in range, nor responding to the research I did on the layered, changing, and complex history of an Irish town 'sphere of influence'). Personally, I have no interest in promoting yoga centres or the 'Burren Discovery Trail' or this hotel or another, but that's what I read. If I misunderstood the source or the style guide, that's fine, correct it please. But there's nothing more going on here. I think all of the other historical information I've added could be seen as a positive and fairly significant contribution to the article, so please let's keep this conversation balanced. Other comment: Vandalism claim is directed at The Banner for engaging in unprincipled behaviour... reverting and flagging without a single source to back it up. Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 16:06, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Reading your edit notes... Again, I am trying to follow the style guide for towns you provided. This is not a tourist style entry as I am simply reporting what the national and regional tourist office says and citing them. The difference being how it is presented... like the difference between 'The Eiffel tower is the most important site in Paris', vs "The French government via their website https://www.france.fr/ regularly promotes the Eiffel tower as the most important tourist site in Paris'. To me that reads very differently. One is opinion masked as fact, the other is a fact about marketing. What I'm struggling with is why me proving a point with a source is being thrown out as kind of uppity, and when an account - with a user name promoting a neighbouring county - is permitted to throw up barricades based not on expertise or research, but on feelings alone? That's a double standard in which I do all the work and receive all of the criticism. Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 16:22, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Hiya.

RE: "addressed about [applicability of WP:CITSTRUCT]". Fair enough. I'd overlooked that specific prompt in the sea of other stuff. Apologies. To address that point, in honesty, I think that WP:CITSTRUCT is a useful way of ensuring that settlement articles have at least some consistency in layout. (In terms of order, of structure and of section headings. Otherwise these things become wildly inconsistent.) While Irish towns/cities/villages/settlements are not expressly mentioned, I don't see why we wouldn't apply the guidance generally. (I would note however that I do not read CITSTRUCT as you seem to have read it. That its an invite/request/mandate to have content covering every one of those sections in every article. And that it should be populated with stuff from a broader area. To my read it doesn't say that at all. Nor does the text you quote above justify adding stuff about yoga in Kinvara or whatever.)

RE: "what is the range". While there is no concrete guideline, my own "common sense" barometer says that its more about "overlap" than it is about "range". In short, if the content you are adding is about stuff in (or much closer to) Kilmacduagh or Kinvara or Kiltartan or Derrybrien or whatever, then I'd have to question why it's being covered in the article about Gort. And why we want it to be. If you haven't asked/answered yourself that question, then perhaps you should. The Banner keeps asking that question and, absent an answer, is reading it as potential promotional intent. Or at least, if not intent, a concern that the result is at least quasi-promotional in tone.

RE: "only editor making constructive and sourced edits, and reading through other peoples sources". I'm not sure I'm the only one. But I do take time to read everything. And, in that vein, would ask you to relook at your "yoga and fishing" addition. As, as per this cite check and tag, I really don't think it stacks up.

Cheers. Guliolopez (talk) 16:31, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

On your comments on range you list Kilmacduagh or Kinvara or Kiltartan or Derrybrien. All are very different places. Kilmacduagh is maybe 4 houses across from the monastic site... Every single person in that area would travel almost daily to Gort, go to mass in Gort, drink in Gort. Kilmacduagh is also a cemetery for Gort. Thus only in name is Kilmacduagh not part of Gort (Safe to say everything on this map is modern Gort or Gort and District). Kinvara is a short drive away at 15 minutes on a small back road, but is a tourist and retirement town with few 'real' services. Daily traffic between the two is common and many resources are shared (e.g. Kinvara has a community art gallery that is used by artists in Gort). Kiltartan is the historic name for the region, Gort is the historic town that is the 'capital' of that region. Kiltartan could also be understood as a small crossroads next to Coole Park. There is an old school house there that, because no one really lives there, is closed and used as a Lady Gregory museum. Same comments about dependency, interconnectivety, and frequency of use apply. Derrybrien hasn't really entered the debate, but it is closer to the next regional centre of Loughrea and has its relationships there. Although I know several people that commute from there to Gort. There's loads of other similar examples... people come 40 minutes from Ballyvaughan to run businesses in Gort or to shop. Kilbeacanty and Peterswell each have a pub and maybe some other facilites, but are essentially suburbs of Gort. All of this is what I was trying to address in the comments about baronies and parishes and it just doesn't translate to other places very easily. I will look for more sourcing on this but in my opinion - for what that's worth - Kilmacduagh, Kiltartan, Kilbeacanty, Beagh, Peterswell, Coole are part of the Gort region. And they don't need any justification to be included. I hear what has been said, although I don't like the 'attack mode' approach some editors have taken, but believe that regional sites are fairly well covered by historical, geological connections in the article at this stage, so having a list of them under something like 'regional sites' kinda makes no difference anyway now. Thanks, Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 17:11, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

There isn't a "Gort region" that Gort is "capital" of? Commuting distance is irrelevant - I have colleagues who commute from Galway to Dublin! You're saying you don't need justification to include places, but you're also saying that I and others need justification - sources, no less! - for explaining why somewhere that isn't in or near Gort should be excluded? Please at least be consistent! Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 18:18, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

@Bastun First of all there very much is a Gort region (one easy example is the Gort and Disrict show) and I've laid it out pretty clearly above and it is evident throughout the article. Your friend that commutes to Dublin is fairly extreme, a better example might be how Tallaght is now part of the city. But, more importantly, if you have a look at this paragraph above it is quite a specific reply - and a self acknowledged anecdotal one - to Guiliolopez remarks on "Kilmacduagh or Kinvara or Kiltartan or Derrybrien". And explaining the differences between them. Which there are significant ones. Try reading what I wrote again, but calmly. It's about providing some local context to someone who may not know. It's about understanding 1000 year old parish may not be relevant today. Gort town centre is comprised of 3 townlands and 3 different parishes, (there were 2 landlords charging rents on different sides of the street a little over a hundred years ago) yet I think we all know there is no reason to have 6 or 8 articles on it. Please also read what I wrote above about overlapping territorial histories (baronies, parishes, townships, counties, electoral districts). No one is applying a double standard, as there is no standard. If you lay out a criteria especially an enraged one (as it reads from my end of some of these edits), I am asking for a rationale at the least, and reference to some Wikipedia discussion, precedent, agreement, or style sheet at best. Firing off opinions is utterly pointless. So, this is exactly about trying to find some definition to what is being discussed. Meanwhile... we've actually come up with one (which points us to include in a Attractions / Amenities section "parks (local, regional, provincial parks)" (like Kilmacduagh, Coole, Thoor Ballylee, Dunguaire, Burren National Park are), which is all I ever did (again much like how Poulnabrone Dolmen (at 9.1 km away) in Ballyvaughan's article is 'ok'). The article seems to have found some clarity amidst compromise, so that's positive. and even more... It is very much enhanced since a week ago. Regards, Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 19:20, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Since when is a "district" equivalent to a "region"? Whatever, I'm not here to argue semantics. Just to point out I am in no way "enraged", nothing in my comments on this page would point to anything approaching that, and you may want to calm down a bit before accusing editors of things like that. My bottom line is largely reflected in Guliolopez's comments below. If you have to hop in a car and drive to a different county - or 20k away in the same county - it's not appropriate to an article for a small Irish town. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 21:39, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

You are clearly busy with a promo-campaign and editwarring. Every reasoning of others is ignored by you in a brilliant case of WP:IDIDNOTHEARTHAT. Please stop with that. The Banner talk 14:56, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

This removal is also interesting seeing your campaign. The Banner talk 15:03, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

I have removed the mentions of yoga, cycling and fishing from the "places of interest" (tourism) section. The tag I added was not addressed. Certainly adding the words "promoted activities include" text didn't address the fact that the website that "promotes them" (burrenlowlands.org) is "promoting" that yoga occurs in Kinvara and Lahinch, that cycling occurs in places like Ballinderreen and that fishing occurs generally in "the lakes & rivers in Galway and Clare". Otherwise, in all honesty, I am all but checked-out of this thread. As noted, I have (as always) strived to be constructive, collaborative and positive. But, it seems to me that WP:IDHT (and indeed WP:SATISFY) is now in the rearview mirror. I have been delighted to see (and contribute to) the improvements to the history and other sections. I am done with the (frankly incomprehensible) push to expand the "places of interest" and "tourism" section(s) to include stuff not in (and even appreciably near) the town of Gort. I don't see any point in continuing to contribute to this thread. No need for another wall of text in response. Guliolopez (talk) 20:06, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

It's not very nice Guliolopez to leave remarks or questions on your edits as they can't be responded to. They will just remain as sort of accusations in the edit history. I already wrote to you I was trying to fill out a section as per the style guide. Maybe that is misguided. We already covered that I thought? Bikes, Walks, Golf all happen in Gort and are simply a reflection of those tourist sites. You raised the point on yoga, so I removed it. You have now removed all the activities and I honestly don't care in the slightest. It's all been hashed over as far as I can tell. Regards, Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 20:04, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

The reason this discussion has gone on and on is because no one has bothered to define what constitutes an attraction, place of interest, amenity or whatever you want to call it for a town. If you want to argue that they must be in the townlands themselves and 'here is a link to that map', then at least do that. Rather everyone chiming in on here will tell me "no, that's not it" until I take another stab at it. Define your perimeters. Why is that so difficult a request? I have not defended the inclusion of anything that local historians (esp via Gort: a journey through time and Guaire) don't connect and consider part of the town. Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 20:20, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

While, perhaps, some of us could have been clearer about expectations (and, like myself, were relying on a loosely-defined "common sense" expectation [stuff in/near Gort and not in other places/counties]), the simple fact is that WP:VER and WP:RS is what matters. The sources you added, like the burrenlowlands.org website (which covers a very broad area spanning two counties) simply doesn't link many of the "attractions" to Gort at all. Anyway, I'm done now. The policy (and the advice and consensus input from other editors based on that policy) is that we should only include "attractions/places of interest" that are actually and verifiably in or connected to the subject town. Continuing to edit or argue against that (with an expectation that others draw a box or circle for you as if that's what matters) isn't getting us anywhere. I'm done discussing it now. I've tried my hardest to be collaborative and constructive. And, while I think that's resulted in improvements in the article, it isn't doing any good here in the margins. Certainly another 100 words from me isn't going to get us anywhere.... Guliolopez (talk) 20:57, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

See also

Looks like this section is superfluous and can be removed. All items are linked in the plain text before. The Banner talk 20:25, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

better-template

Someone keeps removing the better-templates. These stated: {{better|reason=a catalogue does not verify the content it is supposed to verify|date=November 2022}}. Unfortunately an entry from a library-catalogue is not a suitable source as it does not back up the information it is supposed to back up. It only proves that a source exist but that is not enough per WP:VER. The Banner talk 20:35, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

They're being removed because they aren't applicable. I don't know what you even mean by 'Library Catalogue', I have cited that information with well researched and authoritative books on the topics (and a major newspaper!). WP:CITEHOW Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 20:49, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Ehm, no. You are now citing a catalogue, not a book. I severely get the idea that you have idea what you are actually citing, just to fancy up the article.The Banner talk 21:20, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

You're grasping at straws here... just to obstruct improvements to this article? It's funny you keep talking about a catalogue, maybe you're referring to the ISBN and OCLC numbers? Those are automatically generated by the Wikipedia Editor software. I'm literally sitting her with these books at my side. You could maybe Google the titles and see for yourself? Please refrain from more non-constructive edits! Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 22:25, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Aha, there are the attacks again. According to Template:Cite book: url: URL of an online location where the text of the publication named by title can be found. (...) If applicable, the link may point to the specific page(s) referenced. (...). Worldcat does not provide the text of a publication. By the way, if you have the physical books at hand, just cite the book without the URL. The Banner talk 23:01, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Ok? I am not using URL's for the books. Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 23:32, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

I give up, I will get that tourist guide out of my library tomorrow. The Banner talk 23:38, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Great, as you're making absolutely no sense and are being incredibly parochial and territorial about your opinions. Let's stick to facts and making a better article. Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 23:47, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

/me keeps mirror up. 23:53, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Disruptive edits

I see no reason why a single editor has the right to individually determine some cited quotes from acceptable sources are suitable for article inclusion and others aren't. This is disruptive editing, utterly subjective, and soapboxing... (apperently against a neighbouring town based on what's written here). What makes a Wikipedia article encyclopedic is a range of sourced information from different people. Not one self appointed provincial 'authority'. 93.107.125.143 (talk) 13:46, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Tendentious editing#Righting great wrongs. I know their is a lot of opposition against the biogas installation, but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a forum for activism. The Banner talk 16:16, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure what your links are referring to (your own edits are soapboxing and tendacious! And also just grammatically incorrect) as I am helping the article with sourced information. For some reason you've taken it upon yourself to decide what is proper and to your liking to include in an article, but that's not how citations work. Removing cited information for that or for no reason at all is disruptive editing. Happy Christmas and happy to hear out an explanation but otherwise this behaviour should stop your lordship. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.107.125.143 (talk) 17:52, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Most of the content you are adding is not encyclopaedia speech. This is an encyclopaedia, not the local newspaper trying to rile up the villagers against the big evil. It's fine to mention it's being built, but not to sensationalise it and up tabloid it. Canterbury Tail talk 21:07, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

If it's the biggest one in the country and a reliable source reports that, why should it be edited out? Isn't that is an example of bias?? ie Let's not report a fact to downplay the reality of the situation 93.107.125.143 (talk) 16:48, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Because the size of the plant is plain irrelevant. The Banner talk 23:11, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

The repeated "final word" edits and revisions of a single editor on here are downright appalling and oddly considered acceptable. Never has including a sourced detail like size or location been non-encyclopaedic. Am absolutely disgusted with the bully culture that is tolerated on Wikipedia and the bogger version of it on Irish articles. Am calling on a more patient and senior editor to review the nonsense that regularly passes here. Regards, Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 15:35, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

I was expecting you already. The Banner talk 17:26, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Proposed update to Biogas court case

Looks like there have been some issues here previously, without diving into that, I think the following, or some version of it is a relevant update to the circumstances and reveals some of the drama/tension that has existed around this proposal. Namely, that there was a groundswell of support visible in the donations made to hire solicitors, and that the solicitors won. This has been announced. All of the language and sources used are neutral.

In December 2022, An Bord Pleanála overturned a Galway County Council planning decision and permission was granted for a biogas plant near the town. The Gort Biogas Concern group raised over €80,000 in January of 2023 for legal representation, shortly after national headlines were made when bags of dung were thrown at "Minister of State Anne Rabbitte during a public meeting" in protest to the plant by a local farmer. By August, a challenge against the planning decision was being heard by the High Court and in November the campaigners against the plant declared it “no longer a threat”.

Wikipedia is not a forum for activism. Wikipedia:Tendentious editing#Righting great wrongs. The Banner talk 16:49, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

You seem to say that a lot and I believe are the most tendentious editor on here. I understad your link there perfectly, I wish you did as well. If there is sourced information from reliable sources that paints a fuller picture in a neutral way in this digital encyclopedia then it can/should/needs to be included. Looking forward to hearing another voice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.107.125.143 (talk) 15:49, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Notable People

Can https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Lahiffe be added? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.107.125.143 (talk) 15:46, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

 Done The Banner talk 17:23, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Places of interest

Can Gort as an Architectural Consrvation Area be added to first paragraph? https://www.galway.ie/en/media/Aguis%C3%ADn%C3%AD%207%20Architectural%20Conservation%20Area_0.pdf 93.107.125.143 (talk) 06:34, 9 January 2024 (UTC)