Talk:W. T. Cosgrave

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Discussion[edit]

Reference the correction of "Collins's"

Although there is no universally accepted rule of thumb governing the formation of the positive case of names which end in "s", the most accepted practice would seem to be not just to place an apostrophe at the end of the word but to add another "s" - Mr Jones's coat, St. James's Street; not Mr Jones' coat, St. James' Street.

According to the American Heritage® Book of English Usage online it depends on whether it is pronounced "Coll-ins" and spelled Collins' or pronounced "Coll-ins-es" and then spelled Collins's. Personally I am one of those they mention that always spell s'. Rmhermen 21:24, Oct 9, 2003 (UTC)

In the case of Michael Collins, the majority of people say Coll-ins. Coll-ins-es is a largely regional variation in south-west Ireland. So it is written generally as Collins' view was . . . whereas people write and say Saint James's Hospital. FearÉIREANN 21:46, 9 Oct 2003 (UTC)

---

Please can we use the spelling 'jail'? I know there is some talk about the nativity of spellings and subjects being in agreement, but 'gaol' is no longer current in any english dialect. It is irrelevant whether or not early 20th century Hiberno-English had 'gaol'.

Sure enough Wilde's 'Ballad of Reading Gaol' should remain as such, but articles written this day should have spellings of this day and not of yesterday. All other paths shall lead to an absurdity of spellings. - stet 20:51, 9 Oct 2003 (UTC)

It is still widely used in Hiberno-English and as such belongs in relevant articles. You may not use it. Many, including historians do. It is also officially used in preference to jail (which is seen as 'cowboy American') in the official name of some prisons. FearÉIREANN 21:11, 9 Oct 2003 (UTC)

What does 'widely used' count for? The Independent (Ireland's largest selling newspaper) has this on the front of its website: ' Outrage as toddler joins mum in jail after bin protest ruling ', I would say 'jail' is just as common in as hiberno english as it is in british english. The word 'gaol' is no longer preferred in any english dialect.
For proper names I insist that 'gaol' spellings are stuck to where already in existence, but we ought not try avoid the word because some people object to 'Americanisms'. What you suggest in using 'gaol' is an effect of, not native, but period spellings. Wikipedia policy supports only nativity of spellings. - stet 17:45, 10 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Wiki policy is not to enforce uniformity in english but to accept variations in english usage. Gaol is in use. The Irish Indo was talking about the the bin protests. It uses gaol when writing of Collins and the War of Independence and in other contexts. I know from personal experience, I write freelance for it, its sister paper the Sunday Independent, the Irish Times, the Irish Examiner, the Sunday Times and other newspapers. FearÉIREANN 18:47, 10 Oct 2003 (UTC)

I don't suppose I can compete your bigname list. I yet think it is wrong, and the papers more so for publishing it when they ought to know better. 'Gaol' is unnecessary in any context but proper names, but if you wish to conserve it go ahead. You shall as you will. - 195.92.168.165 01:10, 11 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Jail and gaol are two words with the same meaning. The former was American English, the latter British English and Hiberno-English. As happens sometimes, one form has become the dominant one internationally, in this case the American english version. However gaol still is used though less regularly in British English and Hiberno-English, and as such is a perfectly valid term to use under wiki english usage policy. More english speakers internationally use colour than color, foetus than fetus etc but as both are still used and understood, both are used on wiki. The same is true with gaol. In contrast Apothecary is no longer used for pharmacists in english, so it does not feature in wiki articles. FearÉIREANN 18:02, 11 Oct 2003 (UTC)


I've moved the page to its correct location. His name may technically be William T. Cosgrave but he very rarely called that. He was invariably called W.T. (the joke at the time was that even his wife didn't know what the W stood for!). A small minority of those close to him called him Willie but William T was not a widely used version. It is exactly the same as with John A. Costello who was almost always called John A or by those close to him Jack but never ever John Costello (which is where, at one stage, his page was put on Wikipedia. FearÉIREANN(talk) 02:07, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Citation needed on last para of Legacy[edit]

I have added a {{Citation needed}} tag to the last para of the section on W.T.'s Legacy. The reported comments by DeV to his son Viv are significant, but are hard to rely on unless sourced. --BrownHairedGirl 11:54, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The source was Tim Pat Coogan's book on de Valera, p.426. I've added in the info into the article. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 17:44, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

W.T. Cosgrave → W. T. Cosgrave – Naming conventions -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 15:15, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Survey[edit]

Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

  • Support. Djegan 19:57, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose. Per comments. Djegan 06:36, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Dáil Éireann - Volume 92 - 02 December, 1943 has "W.T. Cosgrove", as did every other Parliamentary Debate page that I could be bothered checking. The article says "W.T." rather than "W. T.". If the man was called W.T., that's what the page should be called, likewise "W. T.". Which was it ? Angus McLellan (Talk)
  • *Support. Scolaire 22:01, 29 August 2006 (UTC) - not sufficiently bothered. Scolaire 19:23, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. One of the strange quirks of the English language seems to be that where someone is known by a number of initials, and the first name is initialised rather than spelt out, the set of initials are written in one of three formats: (1) bunched together; (2) written with a space between each but no period; or (3) written with periods but no spaces between them. So one writes FDR, F D R or F.D.R. but not F. D. R.; JFK, J F K or J.F.K. but not J. F. K.; PW Botha, P W Botha or P.W. Botha, but not P. W. Botha. Similarly here one writes either WT Cosgrave, W T Cosgrave or W.T. Cosgrave. One doesn't write W. T. Cosgrave however. (I did write W. T. Cosgrave in a college essay once and had it marked as wrong!) English is full of these quirks. Often they aren't even formally defined. They just develop. This article is correctly laid out. W. T. Cosgrave would be incorrect, and also look very strange. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 00:13, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose ant_ie 07:36, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Although the proposal seems to be better English, it is I think, inappropriate in this instance. zoney ♣ talk 14:34, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Jtdirl. Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:36, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

Add any additional comments

  • Two days for discussion, then the move. Teke (talk) 17:27, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Moved denied by the community. Teke (talk) 04:20, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Move back?[edit]

Can we move the article back to W.T. Cosgrave, with no space between the W. and the T. ?
Ian Cheese (talk) 15:45, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What's the nameing convention for people known by ther initials? Has it changed? Will you fix all the redirects? Snappy (talk) 00:40, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'm trusting jtdirl above. I'll fix the the redirects (but redirects are not a reason to hold off fixing this mistake). Will I move it?
Ian Cheese (talk) 13:55, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Order?[edit]

What is the star and riband being worn in this picture? Is it something papal? Opera hat (talk) 20:26, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Knight Grand Cross of the Order of Pius IX, awarded 1925.[1]. Opera hat (talk) 20:40, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Category added for it. Snappy (talk) 21:09, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on W. T. Cosgrave. 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:

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) 04:56, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bias?[edit]

This reads too much like a hagiography of the man. A more objective view should be taken of his record in Government. 195.195.218.133 (talk) 20:46, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:W._T._Cosgrave&oldid=1206801191"