Talk:Murder of Robert McCartney
Biography Start‑class | |||||||
|
Northern Ireland Unassessed | ||||||||||
|
Belfast Unassessed | ||||||||||
|
This article touches the heart of many of the political issues involved in The Troubles - there is a real danger of issues concerning neutral point of view with it. I've not marked it with NPOV but have instead tried to balance it and posted this comment to highlight this is about a family and their campaign for justice - it is not about the politics of the area though they form an element of it like they do in almost everything in Northern Ireland. --Flaweddiamond 01:37, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- While I agree that much of what you took out is POV, I think it would be worthwhile to keep in information about the traditionally strained relationship between the Catholic/Nationalist community as a whole -- not just Sinn Fein and the IRA -- and the RUC. It's that suspicious relationshp that makes the McCartney sisters' insistence that the police be involved in the investigation all the more newsworthy in this case. --Jfruh 06:52, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Traditionally IRA support within the Nationalist community did have a considerable element whereby they were seen as an acceptable alternative to the distrusted RUC and provided a 'policing service' in the form of punishment attacks (like that suggested to the McCartney family in this case). With the advent of the peace process and the general change in the political climate, this 'old style' approach is gradually seen as less acceptable by many. Rather than try to distill Nationalist attitudes from 1969 (and earlier) till today into a few sentences within this article, perhaps a reference item to one or more of the many other wiki articles on The Troubles would help provide that background. Your comments could serve as a reasonable summary on the subject and then refer further research elsewhere ? --Flaweddiamond 08:36, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- The disturbing thing about this is that it apparently wasn't even a punishment that could be "justified" as a punishment beating even in the eyes of the IRA. It was just a bunch of guys behaving like thugs.
Wag ?
Err.. whats a Wag?--195.7.55.146 11:04, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Wits, jokers. -- Arwel 11:08, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
"Support for Sinn Féin dipped"
Removed request for citation: What better proof for the "dip in Sinn Féin's support" than the loss of the Short Strand seat, which is already stated in the article ? The Gnome 09:59, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
that does not source "Opinion polls, all over the island of Ireland, showed a dip in support for Sinn Féin after the murder". the loss of short strand shows a dip in support in short strand.
Named Suspects Unreasonably Removed
I went to some trouble adding this section in some time ago, and while I have no problem with it being edited, I don't see why it was removed. Especially as 213.252.239.3 did'nt explain why he/she chose to do so. This is an extremely important story, and deserves as much good work as we can collectivly give it. Thank you. Fergananim
inappropriate article name?
Does anyone else find it off-putting that the article title basically states that the only thing Robert McCartney ever did was die? And that there is zero bibliographic information, to the extent that his birthdate isn't included? A page split between the man and Murder of Robert McCartney may be warranted. - BanyanTree 00:58, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Robert McCartney's name only became more widely known when he was murdered. Sad as this may be, it's the undeniable truth - unless someone can show that McCartney's life, decent and honorable as it might have otherwise been, was worthy of a Wikipedia mention by itself. Therefore the main focus of the entry is correctly his murder, and his previous life is presented as the background to it, as befits an encyclopaedia entry. (On the other hand, the McCartney family website is quite right and entitled to carry a fuller biography.)The Gnome 06:09, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
- This is a fair comment - it is perhaps excessively insensitive under the current title and a re-naming or transfer would be entirely in order. 01:22:00 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- As the original author of the article (admittedly a fairly half-hearted attempt) I agree with you. I'll move it to Murder of Robert McCartney, as that's what the article is actually about. It's unfortunate but true that what makes Robert McCartney notable is the circumstances of his death, so there isn't a great deal we could say in a seperate article on the man himself. Also, I have to say that for reasons I can't fathom this article appears to have gone downhill since I wrote it. Partly this is because I didn't keep it up to date, and subsequent developments, of which there have been many, have been added in a kind of haphazard way. The more mysterious matter is the unexplained removal somewhere along the line of the thorough references section I included in the original version. If I have time I may give this article a full overhaul and bring it properly up to date. I was slightly shocked to see that this page is top of the list if you put "Robert McCartney" into Google. I feel a responsibility to make a proper job of it now, but there's a lot to be done. — Trilobite (Talk) 17:28, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- The page still reads "Robert McCartney (murder victim)", being redirected from "Murder of Robert McCartney". Clearly, the page should be titled Murder of Robert McCartney, with the various alternatives redirecting to it. The Gnome 09:38, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- Done. Well done. This whole chapter is now redundant. The Gnome 06:17, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
no verdict
Please forgive my ignorance if i am wrong, but it hardly seems objective to state that the murder was carried out by IRA members while there hasn't yet been a verdict in this case. Right?
- Nope the provos admitted volenteers committed the murder, they then offered to kill the (now) ex-volenteers. SCVirus 19:10, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
Incorrect
This is an entirely incorrect and misguided statement, Being a member from the Short Strand I can account that there was no such level of intimidation towards the McCartney's but rather left of their own free will 'claiming' intimidation. In particular few of the McCartney sisters actually remained in the short strand at the time of the murder and significantly Paula McCartney had all ready intended to leave the short strand prior to the murder having already placed her house on sale. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Fitzpatrick1 (talk • contribs) .
- To what end would they do this? Here was a nationalist family who, it would seem, would previously would have had no axe to grind with Sinn Fein. The act carried out has no frame of reference within any political struggle by those who claim to be "soldiers" of a cause, it was a trivial pub argument followed by an undisciplinned and thuggish reaction. Those who were involved in the clear up and cover up were as bad as the purpetrators. I hope they get AIDS. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.134.46.231 (talk) 12:26, 16 December 2006 (UTC).
- Robert McCartney's partner, Ms Hagans, along with her children, decided to leave the neighborhood (which, she states, has been home to her family for "a hundred years") on account of "intimidation" by locals. And Ms Hagans can rightfully be considered a member of the McCartney family. Among other incidents, it was reported at the time (see link to The Guardian report, in References) that a crowd of protesters chanted outside her home "Out! Out!" Subsequently to the episodes of harassment and beatings, Sinn Féin party member Gerry Kelly condemned (somewhat mildly) the "intimidation", saying that it "is wrong and should not be happening." In so many words, intimidation occured, it was serious, and forced members of the McCartney family to leave the area. The Gnome 09:34, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Clean-up and NPOV
Without expressing opinion on the facts, there are a number of uncited claims in the piece. I fixed some, but have not been able to go through all of them. Whether true or otherwise, or even "obvious", claims about Sinn Fein support etc. need some explanation or they're not appropriate. Supporters should want to buttress the claims (at least by explaining the logic more directly in the piece) and opponents, well, they know what they want to do, too. The wording of the piece in general also seems sufficiently POV that I tagged it. Perhaps with more attention to sources, that tone will go away.Czrisher 13:39, 14 June 2007 (UTC)