text:
Talk:Mary Lou McDonald

Who was first
Was Bairbre de Brún or Mary Lou McDonald the first elected MEP? Each page is claiming they were - is there any way of determining which takes precedent in any seniority rankings? Timrollpickering 23:19, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Mary Lou McDonald was, by one day. Bairbre de Brun is more "senior" in the party, I'd guess. Kiand 19:59, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I updated the image in the article.--padraig3uk 11:52, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup?
What part of this article exactly do you think requires a clean up? I find nothing specifically wrong with it, please discuss, I will remove the tag if there are no suggestions.--Freikorp (talk) 18:30, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Thomas Murphy
Could someone explain why we need the term "convicted criminal" in the sentence "McDonald initially backed convicted criminal Thomas "Slab" Murphy as a "good republican" despite being found guilty on nine charges of tax evasion", since it already says he was found guilty of tax evasion. It is pointless duplcation.DanceHallCrasher (talk) 13:01, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Maybe because he is a convicted criminal... IrishSpook (talk) 13:03, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
 * That does not explain why it needs to be said twice in the same sentence.DanceHallCrasher (talk) 13:04, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
 * It's not. IrishSpook (talk) 13:04, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
 * The sentence refers to him being convicted of tax evasion, since when is that not a criminal conviction? Mo ainm  ~Talk  13:07, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I am curious as to whether User:DanceHallCrasher and User:Mo ainm are the same person, the timing and coincidences seem odd. User:DanceHallCrasher has already been linked to the sockpuppets User:Gob Lofa and User:Lapsed Pacifist. Has there been an investigation? IrishSpook (talk) 13:16, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Gone quiet are we? IrishSpook (talk) 13:20, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Nice deflection yeah there was and no connection so would you like to continue the discussion or just throw your toys out of the pram? Since when was tax evasion not a criminal conviction? Mo ainm  ~Talk  13:23, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
 * It's the same as Mary Lou's introduction on this article. "Mary Lou McDonald (born 1 May 1969) is an Irish politician, the Vice-President of Sinn Féin and a Teachta Dála (TD) for Dublin Central.[2] McDonald was a Member of the European Parliament (MEP) from 2004 to 2009, representing the Dublin constituency." We don't just assume she is an Irish politician based on the fact she was elected at whatever dates, etc. Same applies for good aul Slab Murphy, a convicted criminal... found guilty on 9 counts of tax evasion. No one other than someone who has a problem with the truth would object to this trivial sideshow. IrishSpook (talk) 13:29, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Request for comment - Thomas Murphy
Does the sentence "McDonald initially backed convicted criminal Thomas "Slab" Murphy as a "good republican" despite being found guilty on nine charges of tax evasion" need to include the term "convicted criminal" since his tax evasion convictions are already mentioned? Mo ainm ~Talk  13:35, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
 * We already have a discussion above. And yes. WP:POINT anyone? IrishSpook (talk) 13:36, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

No I see no need for the repetition, though the sentence might be re-written as "McDonald initially backed Thomas "Slab" Murphy, who she described as a "good republican" despite him having been convicted on nine charges of tax evasion". Yes 'Slab' is a 'convicted criminal', but what does it add to say so? Since the specific crimes are stated immediately after. Pincrete (talk) 13:16, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Request for comment - Mary Lou
Does the sentence "Mary Lou McDonald (born 1 May 1969) is an Irish politician, the Vice-President of Sinn Féin and a Teachta Dála (TD) for Dublin Central. McDonald was a Member of the European Parliament (MEP) from 2004 to 2009, representing the Dublin constituency." need to include the term "Irish politician" since her election details and dates are already mentioned? IrishSpook (talk) 13:39, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Barack Obama's article starts with "is an American politician serving as the 44th President of the United States", WP:POINT anyone? Mo ainm  ~Talk  13:43, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
 * No way!! I concede. IrishSpook (talk) 13:47, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Yes per WP:Pope, millions of readers are going to have no idea what Sinn Féin is, what a TD is, and may even need to be reminded where Dublin is. Plus it follows a standard format per Obama/Queen Liz/whoever. You might want to close this if the matter is settled. Pincrete (talk) 13:04, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Troubles restrictions
I see no reason why Mary Lou McDonald should be a party to the troubles restrictions. She was a member of Fianna Fail during the 1998 Good Friday Agreement and only stood for Sinn Fein (unsuccessfully) in 2002, after "The Troubles" were over. Not one of the other 22 Sinn Fein TDs bar Gerry Adams (who was actually active during the troubles with SF/IRA) has this restriction on their talk page. IrishSpook (talk) 14:24, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
 * "All articles related to The Troubles, defined as: any article that could be reasonably construed as being related to The Troubles, Irish nationalism, and British nationalism in relation to Ireland falls under WP:1RR (one revert per editor per article per 24 hour period). When in doubt, assume it is related. Deputy leader of one of the main protagonists in The Troubles, is without doubt directly connected to the Troubles let alone "reasonably construed". Mo ainm  ~Talk  14:30, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
 * 1. None of the other 22 SF TDs have this restriction apart from Adams. 2. You are using the restriction to suit your own agenda. If it didn't say "convicted criminal Thomas Murphy", you wouldn't have placed the restriction in the talk page. IrishSpook (talk) 14:38, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
 * This is at least the second time you have accused me of having an agenda, and I've asked you to remain civil on a couple of previous occasions so could you please desist from personal attacks and deal with the content, not your perceived notions, also if you honestly think that any SF member isn't covered by Troubles restrictions just because it doesn't have the template on the talk then it says a lot about your competency to edit here, seeing as you have breached the 1RR on this article and then edit warred on the talk page also, then maybe you aren't competent enough to edit in a volatile area like The Troubles. Mo ainm  ~Talk  15:46, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
 * And this is at least the second time you've asked me to "remain civil" and then going on to attack me. You're using the troubles restriction template to suit your own agenda, pure and simple. You don't seem to like the truth... Also Mary Lou has the "This page is about an active politician who is running for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. Because of this, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism." warning as well as the BLP template, no reason to tar her with the brush of the troubles when she wasn't involved in it. IrishSpook (talk) 15:57, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Ard Fheis or Party Conference?
Though the article uses the term 'party conference' once in the article, McDonald also refers specifically to 'our special Ard Fheis' in the same article. It is the official term used for Irish party conferences by Sinn Féin (and many other Irish political parties for that matter). In addition, though the term 'party conference' is used once in this article, 'Ard Fheis' is commonly used in the Irish media more generally. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seosamh is ainm dom (talk • contribs) 08:48, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
 * We go by common usage on Wikipedia, not what McDonald said. Also, 99.99999% of readers don't understand the Irish language, so party conference is used. Spleodrach (talk) 08:55, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

 * The term is commonly used in Ireland. The media widely uses the term 'Ard Fheis'. I can refer you to many examples. In contrast, the term 'party conference' is not nearly as commonly used. If translation is a problem, then perhaps we can go with 'Ard Fheis (party conference)'. Furthermore, I can point you to a number of wiki articles where the term Ard Fheis is used. Nearly all Irish people (even those who do not have Irish) will be familiar with the term. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seosamh is ainm dom (talk • contribs) 09:01, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
 * And what 99.99999% of Wikipedia readers who don't understand the Irish language? In the interests of compromise I've edited the article to include both terms. Spleodrach (talk) 09:47, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
 * You could apply that rationale to a myriad of Irish governmental and political institutions. I am sure many non-Irish people find it difficult to read and correctly pronounce 'Taoiseach'. This has no baring on the fact that it is both the official and most commonly used term to refer to an Irish prime minister. Regardless, that compromise works for me. Seosamh is ainm dom (talk) 11:08, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Fianna Fáil
In the Dáil Éireann section, it states that "While she attended some Fianna Fáil meetings, she did not join the party". This is at odds with what it says on the infobox: Clarity? KingWither (talk) 16:57, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

 * I have reverted the recent change regarding this. The existing reference cited states When I was in my 20s, a friend of mine invited me to a Fianna Fáil meeting and I went to a couple of more meetings but it was very clear I was in the wrong place. I never joined the Fianna Fáil party. FDW777 (talk) 20:52, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

 * An Phoblacht, as a publication created solely to promote the people, positions, and policies of Sinn Fein and associated groups, should not be taken as a reliable source on this. Particularly in 2008 when Fianna Fail were being popularly blamed for the collapse of Ireland's economy. Post-2008 Irish economic downturn Bobafettucine (talk) 21:41, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

 * An interview with Mary Lou, in her own party's publication, is a reliable reference. FDW777 (talk) 23:37, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

 * I disagree that a PR outlet for a political party is a reliable source, particularly when it is contradicted by her statements elsewhere Bobafettucine (talk) 09:36, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

 * It's not contradicted. FDW777 (talk) 11:25, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

 * At no point in this interview does Mary Lou state she was a formal member. FDW777 (talk) 22:10, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

 * In that interview she says "I discovered that I was just in the wrong party" in relation to Fianna Fail. I have altered this section to read "In 1998, she briefly joined Fianna Fáil, and later the Irish National Congress" Bobafettucine (talk) 21:36, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

 * I said "formal member". That involves things like filling in a membership form and paying a fee. Did she say that? No. You don't have to be a formal member to attend meetings, as Mary Lou has admitted to doing. The claim you are adding is disputed, and in fact denied by the subject, and shouldn't be added without consensus. FDW777 (talk) 23:37, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
 * She says, in the video, that she was in Fianna Fail "I was just in the wrong party". I'm not sure how much more is required? Bobafettucine (talk) 09:36, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, but she doesn't say she was a formal member, one who has officially joined. FDW777 (talk) 11:25, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

 * I agree with FDW777, there is no evidence she was a member. Attending a few meeting when you are a student does not make you a member. There is no consensus to add this. Spleodrach (talk) 08:10, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
 * as a new editor with around 20 edits, you would be better off to stop edit warring and respect the consensus. Spleodrach (talk) 12:49, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
 * There seems to be an issue with stating that Mary Lou was for a time, a member of Fianna Fail, which is pretty much accepted as fact elsewhere. I added an edit to the wiki, which had 3 separate independent citations stating this, but it was removed. One reference from the Irish state broadcaster, RTE, the other from the British State broadcaster, the BBC and one from an Irish digital outlet called, 'thejournal.ie' , where it said, "You may not have been aware that for a brief period in the 1990s, Sinn Féin’s deputy leader Mary Lou McDonald was a member of that other republican party, Fianna Fáil.". This article also contains a short video clip that confirms May Lou herself stating word for word, that 'The reality is that she discovered that she was in the wrong party' and also 'I wasn't staying in Fianna Fail'. This seems pretty iron-clad to me. I found another source in the Sunday Independent that states the same about her past membership of Fianna Fail . For some reason in this wiki only the bar is set where the words 'formal member' must be used, but that to me is disingenuous as that criteria is not used for other Irish politicians either on Wikipedia or other Irish publications e.g. Leo Varadkar, Michael Martin and other SF politicians like Pearse Doherty and Eoin O'Brion. If all these separate independent sources are not acceptable to add a sentence about Mary Lou's past Fianna Fail membership, why is that, and who unilaterally decided to set the bar so high here, when I have not seen other Wikipedia pages set this criterion. Are RTE, the BBC, thejournal.ie and the Sunday Independent all wrong?  Jdaly81 (talk) 22:47, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

 * As above, Mary Lou McDonald denies being a member. FDW777 (talk) 22:50, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

 * She can deny whatever she wants, but the sources I have referenced are independent and verifiable and up to date. The denial that she was ever a 'formal member' of Fianna Fail is from an article published by An Phoblacht which is not an independent news outlet (it is as per its wiki a newspaper published by Sinn Fein), while the other references are. An Phoblacht article is also from 2008, while the other references are from as early as 6 months ago. Also, the RTE profile reference is used at least twice in other areas of this wiki, yet we dismiss this part of the RTE profile where it says, "In the late 1990s, she joined the Irish National Congress and Fianna Fáil, before switching to Sinn Féin in 2002 when she ran as a candidate in Dublin West". It seems to me some want to choose what facts certain references cite. Again, this is iron-clad to me, and looking at past edits, the mention of her membership Fianna Fail has been made numerous times by other editors, but edited out by the same editor time and time again. Jdaly81 (talk) 23:26, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

 * I suggest you read WP:ONUS, and stop edit warring to include disputed content. FDW777 (talk) 23:29, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

 * I did read it, and there is no consensus here, or in the past, that is why we are having this discussion. Why is her membership of Fianna Fail controversial? We have on one hand an article with Mary Lou's version of events, from an article 13 years ago (by a Sinn Fein news publication), and from every other source I have referenced from independent news outlets such as RTE (which is good enough for other parts of this wiki) . Why does one automatically assume that the An Phoblacht version of events is correct, while every other outlet is wrong? If the claim is disputed, just say it. I don't have a problem with that. Just say something like, "It is claimed she was a member of Fianna Fail in the mid-1990s, but Mary Lou disputes she was ever a formal member" and cite the sources. Get readers to make up their own mind. Jdaly81 (talk) 23:39, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I think Jdaly81 has suggested a reasonable compromise along the same lines of a solution I was simultaneously suggesting below, in which the claim is acknowledged but shown to be disputed. I also think that they make a point about the An Phoblacht source being given more weight than the three other more modern sources that are not tied to a political party in same manner An Phoblacht is. CeltBrowne (talk) 00:06, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

 * Looking at Jdaly81's sources, I think the user make a credible case. In particular, if we look at the journal.ie source they used, in the video interview the interviewer asks her "Where would you be now if you were still in Fianna Fáil". McDonald does not correct the interviewer by stating "Well, I was never in Fianna Fáil" but instead laughs and says simply that she wasn't going to stay in Fianna Fáil, which implies to me she was in Fianna Fáil but quickly decided to leave. The Independent article also states definitively that she was a member in the "formal member" sense and left FF because she felt she could not advance through the ranks of that party. I think rather than dismiss this out of hand, I think more sources should be gathered by both those accepting the view she was in FF and those against the view she was in FF, and from there, users should try and work out what is the most credible, plausible version of events. To address FDW777's point that she has sometimes denied membership: While I think that should be acknowledged, I don't think that should be considered a decisive factor either for the following reason. Gerry Adams has always denied membership of the IRA. Contradictorily, there are those who insist he was a member. Rather than take one view or the other, the Gerry Adams article acknowledges both views have been put forward. In relation to this article, the same tact could be applied (emphasis on could, I'm not saying should, I'm offering one possible path): Have a sentence acknowledging a number of sources have suggested she was a Fianna Fáil member, while also acknowledging that McDonald has also denied this. Another solution is to state she "flirted" with Fianna Fáil and acknowledge she attended some meetings, but as others have phrased it, was "never a formal member". I think that if the sources demonstrate it, some kind of acknowledgement that she was at one point linked to Fianna Fáil can be made in the article rather than a blank rejection of the idea. The article does not have to endorse the view she was a "formal" member but can acknowledge the suggestion she was at least "in their orbit" for a short period, again if enough sources demonstrate that. CeltBrowne (talk) 23:53, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

 * Yes, I noticed that as well on the Gerry Adam's wiki page where there is a section relating to his disputed membership/non-membership of the Provisional IRA. I know that topic on Gerry Adams is controversial for some but is Mary Lou's early life membership of Fianna Fail so controversial that it has to be airbrushed out of her wiki page when we have numerous independent sources including state broadcasters who have a general higher journalistic standard than most, include it in their profile of her? Since her interview with the An Phoblacht, I can't find any source where she denied Fianna Fail membership and indeed implicitly accepted it by not denying it in the interview with thejournal.ie years later. She did after all come from a family who had strong Fianna Fail Republican leanings and admitted this herself numerous times. How about we say, "McDonald first joined Fianna Fáil in the mid-1990s but left the party due to core policy differences. However, McDonald once denied she was ever a formal member but did attend numerous Fianna Fáil meetings" Jdaly81 (talk) 00:12, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

 * I'd word it something along the lines of "It has been claimed that McDonald briefly joined Fianna Fáil in the late 1990s but quickly left the party due to core policy differences, particularly in relation to Northern Ireland. McDonald has denied that she was ever a formal member of the party and suggested that her participation in Fianna Fáil was never more than attending a few meetings." The language should avoid stating anything as fact due to the disputed nature of the claims, hence the use of "It has been claimed" and "She has denied". That said, you should wait until more users than just me have commented on this matter before editing the article again, to give a chance for a clear consensus to be achieved. CeltBrowne (talk) 00:55, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

 * I think one has to be cognisant here on how much weight we attach in evaluating the different sources. We have numerous independent reliable sources that claim in the affirmative that she was a member of Fianna Fail many of them would fall under the banner of being a reliable independent source as per Wikipedia guidelines. WP:SOURCE e.g. RTE and BBC. On the other hand, we have the An Phoblacht article which claims she was not a formal member, but as per Wikipedia guidelines would fall under the WP:NOTRELIABLE due to it being a questionable source, that is An Phoblact is the official Newspaper outlet of Sinn Fein. I can not find any other citation that denies that she was a member of Fianna Fail apart from that single source. Therefore we should be attaching much more weight to the affirmative claim of membership than the denial of the claim. On top of that, I have found new sources that validate the affirmative claim, and . The last source is quite clear in the affirmation of the claim where the author describes his own research carried out while writing a book on modern Sinn Fein and gives details to that effect in the article. Indeed there is some confusion as to the motivation of Mary Lou leaving Fianna Fail which merits further debate and should be included as well, but there is absolutely nothing to indicate that she was never a member of Fianna Fail, she appears to again agree that she was a member of the party in that source. With all that said, I think we can confirm on the law of averages that she was indeed a member but also include that she disputed once to being a member. Something like "McDonald first joined Fianna Fáil in the mid to late-1990s but left due to core policy differences, particularly in relation to Northern Ireland and a United Ireland [sources]. McDonald once denied that she was ever a member of the party and suggested that her participation in Fianna Fáil was never more than attending a few meetings [source]". Jdaly81 (talk) 06:31, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

We are not obliged to include this information, and consensus was previously not to include it. You can't include it without the clear denial by Mary Lou McDonald, and a "he said/she said" argument over such a trivial point isn't good article writing. I'll quote from WP:ONUS for you Consensus may determine that certain information does not improve an article and that it should be omitted or presented instead in a different article. The onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content. So, again, please stop edit warring since there is currently no consensus for inclusion in this article, and it is not mandatory to include the information. FDW777 (talk) 20:08, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

With all due respects, WP:YDOW. You seem to be hiding behind the idea of consensus even though in the past other editors like User:Bobafettucine among many others have attempted to include this information and it was everytime deleted by you. The information I am attempting to include is toughly cited and referenced by good verifiable independent sources as per WP:SOURCE. If there is disagreement to the claim, as per the An Phoblact article, then one can also add that. I want to believe you are being a good-faith editor here but with every stonewalling effort that is ebbing that faith away. As I will repeat, you do not own this wiki. WP:YDOW. So we either move on and discuss what we are going to add in relation to her 'alleged' membership of Fianna Fail, or one can stonewall and refuse to even countenance the idea of this edit which just wastes everyone times. At the moment it seems myself and user:CeltBrowne agree at least there should be an edit. As per your 'he said / she said', I refer you to the example in the Gerry Adams wiki page and the alleged membership of the IRA. It should therefore be included here, and that is very generous seeming as we shouldn't put the An Phoblach source on the same level as others like RTE, BBC, TheJournal.ie, Irishnews.com. Lastly, if her early membership of Fianna Fail, is good enough to be included in an RTE/BBC profile report of her, then why isn't it good enough for this wiki and your own editorial standards? Jdaly81 (talk) 21:35, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

 * That's an essay. WP:ONUS and WP:CONSENSUS are policy. You fail to address the point that including a "he said/she said" debate over a minor point in this person's biography is simply not good article writing. It's not even a case of what AP says, it's a straightforward case of Mary Lou McDonald denying the claim you added as fact to the article. FDW777 (talk) 21:52, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

 * And that is what we are talking about here, trying to get consensus, you are dead set against adding this edit to the wiki regardless even if other users agree it should be. I would like to see what and user:CeltBrowne have to say about this. As per user:CeltBrowne Mary Lou implicitly accepts her membership of Fianna Fail by not denying it and is even quoting as saying 'she was in the wrong party'. The An Phoblact citation is a weak source as per wiki guidelines, WP:NOTRELIABLE but you want to assume that that source takes utter precedent over the other 6 or so sources that seem to affirm membership? I did address the 'he said/she said' point. Gerry Adams and his alleged membership of the IRA is included in his wiki page, even though he has always denied membership. Jdaly81 (talk) 22:06, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * To add, from WP:CONSENSUS, "the arguments "I just don't like it" and "I just like it" usually carry no weight whatsoever." and "Consensus cannot always be assumed simply because editors stop responding to talk page discussions in which they have already participated." Jdaly81 (talk) 22:09, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

 * WP:NOTAVOTE. Mary Lou McDonald says When I was in my 20s, a friend of mine invited me to a Fianna Fáil meeting and I went to a couple of more meetings but it was very clear I was in the wrong place. I never joined the Fianna Fáil party. That you attempt to relegate this to "something she claimed once" while stating as fact she joined Fianna Fáil is the problem. I can find you many references that talk, at length, about Gerry Adams' alleged IRA activity. Where are the corresponding references for Mary Lou McDonald? They don't exist, it's a throwaway sentence in the ones provided. FDW777 (talk) 22:26, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

 * WP:NOTRELIABLE. An Phoblacht article is not a reliable source, it is the official newspaper outlet of Sinn Fein where Mary Lou is now head of the party, where its editorial standards and fact-checking would not be as high as RTE, the BBC, thejournal.ie, Sunday Independant, IrishNews, which affirm membership of Fianna Fail to Mary Lou. You also ignore thejournal.ie video where she admits that "she was in the wrong party" emphasis on 'in' and didn't offer any denial that she was ever a member of Fianna Fail when asked directly about her early membership of the party. Clearly, this issue is disputed, so we should add both to the article with sources, and let readers make up their own mind. Jdaly81 (talk) 22:50, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

 * You will find you are in fact mistaken about the reliability of An Phoblacht. I don't ignore anything, it's "he said/she said" as repeatedly stated. And as it's such a minor, inconsequential point (which you haven't refuted) it's better off left out than having bad prose added to deal with the situation. FDW777 (talk) 22:54, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

 * Mistaken how? An Phoblacht is not the offical newspaper of Sinn Fein, ( It is! ) who MacDonald is now head of the Sinn Fein party? They are as independent as RTE or BBC for example? Mary Lou herself is listed as a frequent contributor to the newspaper . Any neutral observer can see an issue with this. WP:NOTRELIABLE An Phoblacht is not reliable in this instance or at least not as reliable as other outlets. WP:NOTRELIABLE Can you find me another independent reliable source where MacDonald denied ever being a member of Fianna Fail? If you can find me a recent RTE article or BBC podcast where she explicitly denies ever being a member of Fianna Fail, if so ill drop it. If not, then...? As per this being a minor detail, it was good enough to include in a RTE and BBC profile of MacDonald, why not here on her wiki page? Are you telling me that the bookies favourite to be the next Taoiseach, the first woman Taoiseach, that her political origins are 'inconsequential'? Why not just let the readers make up their own mind on that, not you. I am willing to let both sides of the story in as an edit, you want nothing and airbrush it out. Can you even give any suggestion as an edit you would be happy with and whose prose you would be happy with as that appears to be your final sticking point, bad prose Jdaly81 (talk) 23:30, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

 * Mistaken because consensus disagrees with your assertion that AP is unreliable. FDW777 (talk) 09:10, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

 * When you say consensus, are you talking about yourself in the third person. As myself, CeltBrowne and User:Bobafettucine all acknowledge that An Phoblacht being the official newspaper for Sinn Fein has an issue with it comes to WP:NPOV and being a reliable source, hence why its WP:QUESTIONABLE Questionable sources are those with a poor reputation for checking the facts or with no editorial oversight. Such sources include websites and publications expressing views that are widely acknowledged as extremist, that are promotional in nature, An Phoblacht exists to promote Sinn Fein. Jdaly81 (talk) 10:50, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

 * No, I'm talking about a consensus that can't be overridden by a few editors on this talk page. AP is considered reliable, accept it and move on. FDW777 (talk) 13:18, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

 * My latest suggestion very much on the lines of what CeltBrowne suggested "It has been alleged that MacDonald first joined Fianna Fáil in the mid to late 1990's but left due to core policy differences, particularly in relation to Northern Ireland and a United Ireland [sources]. McDonald however, once denied she was ever a formal member of the party and suggested that her participation in Fianna Fáil was never more than attending a few meetings [source]" I think that is more than fair, gives both sides, with sources and not considered bad prose or is badly written. Jdaly81 (talk) 23:35, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

 * So, I decided to go in search of some more sources myself as well. In 2013, the website Slugger O'Toole (which focuses on Irish issues with a Northern tint) noted that "She joined Fianna Fail in 1998, turned down a safe council seat and then defected to Sinn Fein shortly afterwards". A "non-formal" member would not have been offered the opportunity to run for a seat that they were thought to easily win. Pat Leahy, writing for the Irish times, repeats that McDonald was in Fianna Fáil in this article . Sarah Bardon also of the Irish Times also repeats that McDonald was a member of Fianna Fáil.. Weirdly, the Jersey Evening Post even specifically names which branch of Fianna Fáil McDonald supposedly joined, their Dublin West branch. Currently, we have one source and one source only indicating that McDonald was not a member, and that source may have been one in which she did not want to say she had been a FF member. On the other hand, we seem to have quite a number of other sources saying she, in fact, a member. Is there not enough ground here to make a simple statement akin to what I've said before: "It has been claimed that McDonald briefly joined Fianna Fáil in the late 1990s but quickly left the party due to core policy differences, particularly in relation to Northern Ireland. In 2008 McDonald denied that she was ever a formal member of the party and suggested that her participation in Fianna Fáil was never more than attending a few meetings." ? A sentence like that still acknowledges the denial from An Phoblacht which you have pointed to many times. CeltBrowne (talk) 00:31, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

 * A ha, I think I've found something that solves this matter and demonstrates clearly that McDonald was in fact "formally" part of Fianna Fáil. This 2014 interview by Ryan Tubridy of McDonald on the Late Late Show (hosted on youtube by SF's official account) has Tubridy directly pose the question of her Fianna Fáil membership to McDonald. McDonald does not say "I was never in Fianna Fáil, I just attended some meetings", instead she says well she had a family background and a lot of friends in FF, and that in her area of Dublin FF was much more accessible than SF. Tuberity then asks "how long were you in Fianna Fáil", to which McDonald responses (at 4:41 of the video) "In total, I think, a year". She then explains, as other sources have indicated, that she left over policy differences relating to Northern Ireland and Social Justice. I think this video should more of less completely settle this debate. She was a "formal" member for one year before her connections Irish National Congress connected her to Republicans and to members of Sinn Féin and she subsequently switched to that party. FDW777, can we say this video, combined with the other sources, settles the matter? CeltBrowne (talk) 01:02, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

 * Excellent bit of research CeltBrowne, I think that more or less settles it. While I was doing my own research, her very own wiki had her membership of Fianna Fail expressed as early as July 2005, one of the first edits of this page . It remained there until August 2018, when it was changed to 'her attending some Fianna Fail meetings'. and then all Fianna Fail references were deleted in a mistaken bulk edit here . References to her Fianna Fail origins are as old as this page itself. Now we need to settle on what to put in. Since we have a statement from McDonald herself on the matter per video, maybe "McDonald first joined Fianna Fáil in the mid to late-1990s but left due to core policy differences, particularly in relation to Northern Ireland and a United Ireland [sources]". Do we still want to reference the An Phoblacht article, as the interview on the late late show is a much more recent source, much more definiate ( from the horses mouth so to speak) and contradicts the article. Jdaly81 (talk) 02:38, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

 * You don't get to exclude her reliably referenced denial because it suits you. There is no dispute she has a family background and attended some meetings, that doesn't make her a formal member (and the video doesn't confirm she was a formal member), which is something she denies. It is up to anyone wishing to include the information to suggest a neutrally worded addition and gain consensus for its inclusion. You can do as much investigating as you like and attempt to draw whatever conclusions suit you, but that doesn't mean you get to state as fact something Mary Lou McDonald denies. FDW777 (talk) 09:09, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

 * You are moving the goalposts now, and adding that there even though in the 10 or so citations we have found affirming membership of Fianna Fail, including Mary Loy herself saying 'she was in the party' and 'she lasted a year (in Fianna Fail)' that the words 'formal' must be there to satisfy your own standard. What next, a photo of her membership card? May I also add that her membership of Fianna Fail was long part of this Wikipedia entry and was changed to something like 'she attended some meetings' not long ago, and then all references to her Fianna Fail past was unilaterally removed by you, in this edit without any attempt to form a consensus or talk about the changes. Why did you do this?  So to throw out terms like WP:ONUS and WP:CONSENSUS is very disingenuous. Indeed the onus and consensus should be, why was it removed in the first place? Now that myself and CeltBrowne have done more than enough leg work to prove that she was a member can we move on? Or are we going to see more stonewalling?  WP:YDOW   — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdaly81 (talk • contribs) 10:35, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Nicolás Maduro election "controversy"
Other than the many references (I haven't checked, but I doubt many of them even mention Mary Lou) dealing with countries either agreeing or disagreeing with the election result, the only reference actually dealing with the "controversy" is this which doesn't actually contain any criticism of Mary Lou or the party although it does link to a related article. That contains criticism by Fianna Fáil Spokesperson on Foreign Affairs and Trade Niall Collins. "One politician criticises another politician" is hardly a controversy is it? FDW777 (talk) 18:25, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

 * As there has been to attempt to justify the inclusion, I have removed it. FDW777 (talk) 08:46, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

"This was seen by some as an attempt to delegitimize the democratic process of the government appointment"
I have reverted this edit, claiming Mary Lou dismissing the coalition agreement as a "marriage of convenience" etc etc was seen by some as an attempt to delegitimize the democratic process of the government appointment. The reference is actually about Thomas Gould's comments, and the reference says He was slated on Twitter with people accusing him of ‘ungracious’ and ‘childish behaviour’ and of disrespecting the democratic process (my emphasis). Thus, Mary Lou has not been accused of disrespecting the democratic process, Thomas Gould has! FDW777 (talk) 20:46, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

RfC about the subject's membership of a political party
Should this article state that Mary Lou McDonald was briefly a member of Fianna Fáil? The factuality of the statement is disputed CeltBrowne (talk) 11:17, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

 * Yes Important to know the root political origins of the next potential Taoiseach and leader of Sinn Fein. This piece of information was part of this Wikipedia entry from almost the very start in July 2005 and remained in some form on the page until an edit in August 2018, when the wording was changed to 'her attending some Fianna Fail meetings'. Then all Fianna Fail references were deleted in a bulk edit by the same editor who now opposes re-adding this original information back . Note that neither of these removals/edits was talked about beforehand or consensus sought. This edit I am trying to do it is not adding new content, it is re-adding back content that was wrongfully taken out.
 * As per the veracity of the claim, we have about a dozen different sources, from various independent media outlets, including implicit recognition from McDonald herself in TV interviews that she was a past member of Fianna Fail.
 * Recent interviews with the Late Late Show has Tubridy directly pose the question of her Fianna Fáil membership to McDonald. McDonald does not say "I was never in Fianna Fáil, I just attended some meetings", instead she says well she had a family background and a lot of friends in FF, and that in her area of Dublin FF was much more accessible than SF. Tuberity then asks "how long were you in Fianna Fáil", to which McDonald responses (at 4:41 of the video) "In total, I think, a year".
 * In the other video interview with thejournal.ie she says about her relationship with Fianna Fail, the interviewer asks If you had stayed in Fianna Fail, where do you think you would be now? which McDonald replies "Well I wasn't staying in Fianna Fail" and "I just discovered I was in the wrong party". Note, when asked about her past membership directly, she never denied her membership or corrected the interview that she was never a member and twice accepted that she was by her answers.
 * There are also numerous other sources that verify the claim. There is the 2020 RTE profile of her In the late 1990s, she joined the Irish National Congress and Fianna Fáil, before switching to Sinn Féin in 2002 when she ran as a candidate in Dublin West
 * The BBC 2020 Profile In the late 1990s, she joined Fianna Fáil in Dublin West and her political opponents say she was keen to climb the political ladder.,
 * The 2016 Irish Times profile of her, written by Pat Leahy references the 1998 Fianna Fail ardfheis from the Irish Times own archive, These militant views did not prevent her from joining Fianna Fáil however, and her earliest entry in The Irish Times archive is contributing to discussions at the party’s 1998 ardfheis.
 * The Irish News has a piece from Deaglán de Bréadún and he writes while researching his book, 'Power Play: The Rise of Modern Sinn Féin' Since she had family connections with Fianna Fáil, it was perhaps inevitable that her first foray into politics would be as a member of that party, in the constituency of Dublin West. Here the story gets complicated. When I was researching my book, Power Play: The Rise of Modern Sinn Féin (Merrion Press, 2015), several long-time Fianna Fáilers told me her advancement in the party was blocked by the late and greatly-missed Brian Lenihan Jr, who later became minister for finance and died of cancer at the age of 52. As one activist put it bluntly, “Lenihan ran her out of it”, because she might take his Dáil seat in Dublin West. This was emphatically denied by Mary Lou who categorically rejected any suggestion that she left the party because she didn’t get a nomination to run for the Dáil. She also firmly rejected claims that she was undermined by Lenihan or anyone else: “That’s not true.”".
 * Slugger O'Toole has the following on her membership of Fianna Fail, She joined Fianna Fail in 1998, turned down a safe council seat and then defected to Sinn Fein shortly afterwards.
 * There are some more references from The Sunday Independent, Belfast Telegraph and so on, that you can easily find online, but I think you get the point. The only denial is from An Phoblacht, which is the official newspaper of Sinn Fein who McDonald is now leader off, thus is a questionable source WP:QUESTIONABLE Jdaly81 (talk)

 * No Minor point in the subject's biography, and denied by the subject who said "When I was in my 20s, a friend of mine invited me to a Fianna Fáil meeting and I went to a couple of more meetings but it was very clear I was in the wrong place. I never joined the Fianna Fáil party". That she has said other things that are more ambiguous since then is irrelevant, that denial is clear and unambiguous. FDW777 (talk) 13:14, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Include - this BBC article seems pretty clear that she was in fact a member (as did every other RS I looked at). Her denying it has little to do with this. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 22:15, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Since when were the BBC experts on the exact party membership status of people in foreign countries in the mid-1990s? Are you suggesting they know better than the person who was supposedly a member? FDW777 (talk) 22:24, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * You are denying all the other sources that state categorically that she was a member, including quite detailed accounts from Pat Leahy from Irish Times and Deaglán de Bréadún in Irish News. Are they all mistaken? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdaly81 (talk • contribs) 23:38, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

 * Include. While it might just be a bullet point in her biography now, there are plenty of reliable sources saying she was a member of Fianna Fáil, as demonstrated above. Thus, inclusion is warranted.  Any denials should be mentioned as well so long as they're cited to reliable sources. –Fredddie™ 22:30, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * That would be a sensible option if the text is to be included. However suggested text (see above) such as "McDonald first joined Fianna Fáil in the mid-1990s but left the party due to core policy differences. However, McDonald once denied she was ever a formal member but did attend numerous Fianna Fáil meetings" is completely non-neutral. FDW777 (talk) 22:35, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't think it necessarily matters why she left FF, especially if it's merely a bullet point in her career. Does this seem more neutral?  "McDonald first joined Fianna Fáil in the mid-1990s but left the party to join Sinn Féin. She once denied being a formal member but did attend numerous Fianna Fáil meetings." –Fredddie™ 22:53, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Well no, because the wording automatically says her denial is false and the inclusion of "once" is wholly unnecessary. FDW777 (talk) 22:56, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I suggested a few times on this talk page a neutrally worded version of the sentence that included the 2008 denial, but you did not comment on or acknowledge these. In light of all the sources now collated, I'd suggest something along these lines: Many sources have stated that McDonald joined Fianna Fáil in 1998 for a period of one year as a member of their Dublin West branch, but that she left the party due to core policy differences, particularly in relation to Northern Ireland and Social Justice. In 2008 McDonald denied that she was ever a formal member of the party and suggested that her participation in Fianna Fáil was never more than attending a few meetings. Some sources have indicated another possible reason for her departure was a personality clash with Brian Lenihan Jr, who feared that she would emerge as an internal rival in his constituency, however, McDonald has strongly denied this was the case. Asked about her participation in Fianna Fáil in 2014, McDonald stated she had been "in the wrong party" and quickly realised that Sinn Féin was a more appropriate party for her Republican views. If you're not happy with this phrasing, could you please make your own suggestion for how this should be worded so that we can come to some mutually agreed upon wording, rather than simply rejecting any suggestion and forcing the process to have to restart each time. CeltBrowne (talk) 23:07, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Goes on for far too long about a largely irrelevant period in the subject's life. The references generally deal with it in a sentence or less, so unclear why we need to go into so much detail. FDW777 (talk) 23:15, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * "She once denied being a formal member but did attend numerous Fianna Fáil meetings."
 * "When I was in my 20s, a friend of mine invited me to a Fianna Fáil meeting and I went to a couple of more meetings but it was very clear I was in the wrong place. I never joined the Fianna Fáil party"
 * As someone looking at this the from the outside, these read very similarly. –Fredddie™ 23:16, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Lose once to make it "She denied being a formal member but did attend numerous Fianna Fáil meetings." and it looks good to me. FDW777 (talk) 23:17, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm going to flip this sentence. "She attended Fianna Fáil meetings in her 20s, but did not join the party formally." –Fredddie™ 23:18, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't like that because it contradicts the other sentence. The second sentence needs a timeframe.
 * "McDonald first joined Fianna Fáil in the mid-1990s but left the party to join Sinn Féin. She denied in being a formal member, but said she attended numerous Fianna Fáil meetings." –Fredddie™ 23:23, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Still implies her denial is false by saying "first joined Fianna Fáil". I preferred your previous suggestion, that was much better. FDW777 (talk) 23:28, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

(copied from above because it's relevant) You are denying all the other sources that state categorically that she was a member, including quite detailed accounts from Pat Leahy from Irish Times and Deaglán de Bréadún in Irish News. Are they all mistaken? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdaly81 (talk • contribs) 23:38, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Your insistence that her membership of Fianna Fáil was "minor" or "irrelevant" is incredulous. She is a politician, her political actions are the most relevant part of this article. Her membership of Fianna Fáil would be much more relevant to the article than what secondary school she went to or what her brothers' professions are, which are included in the first section of the article, or her husbands' profession, which is included in the personal life section. Secondly, the wording you're now supporting basically ignores all the other sources and strips the sentence back down to solely a summary of her 2008 denial. Because of all the sources gathered, it's pretty clear that * The year was 1998 * The Branch was Dublin West * She was considered closely affiliated enough that she was considered a potential candidate for the party. You're effectively not budging at all from your original position that the only source you're willing to consider is the 2008 denial, and forcing every other user to conform to your standard, rather than coming to a compromise, which gets us into WP:OWN territory. You're making it so that we're all deferring to you rather than a mutually agreed-upon outcome. CeltBrowne (talk) 23:42, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

 * Agree with CeltBrowne . Let us not forget that her membership of Fianna Fail was included in this page for about 12 years, until it was edited down, and then removed completely without any efforts to form a consensus. One cannot simply forget about citations from The Irish Times, RTE or her interviews and many many other citations, just because it doesn't suit. It goes against the spirit of Wikipedia. I am happy with CeltBrowne suggestion above. My suggestion is "McDonald first joined Fianna Fáil in the mid-late 1990s but left the party due to core policy differences. However, McDonald once denied she was ever a formal member but did attend numerous Fianna Fáil meetings". If the second sentence is too controversial, then suggest an edit to it, but the first sentence should remain Jdaly81 (talk) 23:51, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Or "McDonald first joined Fianna Fáil in 1998 but left the party after around a year due to core policy differences." [sources] She denied in 2008 being a formal member, but said she admit to attending numerous Fianna Fáil meetings. [source] Jdaly81 (talk) 00:04, 17 February 2021 (UTC).
 * We could take your first sentence and match with it FDW777's suggested second sentence, to create "McDonald first joined Fianna Fáil in 1998 but left the party after around a year due to core policy differences. [sources] She denied being a formal member but did attend numerous Fianna Fáil meetings. [sources]" If that makes all parties happy, I'll back it too so that we finally get to a mutually agreed point. CeltBrowne (talk) 00:28, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I suggested similar right at the start of this talk, but we had to engage in this long drawn out affair to only end up back at the start because of the demands of one editor. Let us agree and move on. However, the words 'formal' is no where to be found in any source, so I don't think we should use that wording, my suggestion for that second sentance She did at one time in 2008 deny being a member of Fianna Fáil but admitted in attending numerous Fianna Fáil meetings.. It reads much better, simplier and closer to the truth.  Jdaly81 (talk) 00:58, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * It's always refreshing when people who demand their changes must be made accuse other people of trying to own the article. Still waiting for a neutral wording to be suggested that doesn't state as fact something the subject denies. FDW777 (talk) 12:58, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * WP:BALANCE Neutral point of view should be achieved by balancing the bias in sources based on the weight of the opinion in reliable sources and not by excluding sources that do not conform to the editor's point of view. This does not mean any biased source must be used; it may well serve an article better to exclude the material altogether. It is better off in this instance that we exclude this one source, as all other sources affirm confirmation to the claim, thus serves the article better. Jdaly81 (talk) 21:56, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

 * Include - The information is presented as factual by a large number of relatable sources. The idea that a politician denying an information should weigh more heavily that dozens of reliable sources claiming it laughable to be honest. PraiseVivec (talk) 12:50, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I've found more sources, and I think the sources are going to speak for themselves:

From this piece by Irish Central : Her first involvement with party politics was as a member of Fianna Fáil. At the party’s ardfheis (national conference) in 1998, she made a speech on the need for police reform in Northern Ireland to ensure fairer representation of the nationalist community. From this piece by the Irish Indepedent In 1998, she joined the Kevin Barry cumann, the Porterstown organisation of West Dublin Fianna Fail, and as a young and eager member of the party she was appointed treasurer. Her mother Joan, from Tipperary was also an enthusiastic party supporter and her father Patrick, a surveyor who now lives in the Middle East, told one local politician that he was glad she had joined the party. We now know, with almost painful detail, the exact nature of McDonald's membership of Fianna Fáil. She joined in 1998. She was a member of the Porterstown organisation of West Dublin Fianna Fail. She was their treasurer. She spoke as a member and speaker at the party's 1998 Ardfheis. She was considered not just a potential local candidate, but a Dáil candidate. This may or may not have upset Brian Lenihan Jr. She remained with FF for roughly one year. She joined Sinn Féin after realising Sinn Féin better matched her political views after meeting members of Sinn Féin through the Irish National Congress. I cannot possibly come closer to proving she was a "formal" member of their party without photocopying a membership card. You cannot be a committee member for your local branch of your party without being a "formal" member. You're not going to be able to get a spot speaking at the party's Ardfheis (especially given FF's popularity in '98) without being a "formal" member. I am now completely confident in stating as fact that Mary Lou McDonald was a member of Fianna Fáil and that the 2008 denial is, in fact, meaningless. Even before I came across these two new sources, two outside editors had made the point the fact she at one point denied it should not be the deciding factor in the inclusion of the information, because her statement in 2008 may not have been accurate. But on top of this, by 2014 it's quite clear she was not denying it, but instead (if timidly) publically acknowledging the fact she was a member. I would like to state for the record I don't see it as any mark at all against McDonald that she was a briefly a member of Fianna Fáil. I am not trying to wedge this information in because I think it will be of detriment to her. I think the reason it's important to include is that it shows the evolution of her thinking and her politics. With now over a dozen sources collected, when combined together revealing the details of McDonald's membership of Fianna Fáil down to the minute detail, I would submit that there should not be any reasonable objections to the inclusion of the information in the article going forward, and that inclusion of the information in the article should not be reverted. CeltBrowne (talk) 21:20, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

 * OK, so are we just going to go with what CeltBrowne wrote earlier which gives more details as to her joining Fianna Fail as to why she left re: Brian Brian Lenihan jnr? Not sure one sentence does it justice anymore as there is a lot more there. It is looking more and more apparent that the denial in An Phoblacht is just flat out wrong. Jdaly81 (talk) 21:49, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * What about McDonald started her political career by first joining Fianna Fáil in 1998. She was a member of the Kevin Barry Cumann, attached to the Porterstown organisation of West Dublin Fianna Fail and was appointed treasurer. She made a speech on the need for police reform in Northern Ireland at the 1998 Fianna Fáil ardfheis. However, she left the party after about a year due to core policy differences, particularly in relation to Northern Ireland and social justice issues. After that one can talk about her joining Sinn Fein and her early start with that party. Jdaly81 (talk) 23:48, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * We don't need that level of detail in the article itself, the only reason we had to go to that level of extreme detail here on the talk page was to firmly establish she was a "formal" member. Here's what we could go with McDonald started her political career by first joining the Fianna Fáil in 1998, but that she left the party after a year due to core policy differences, particularly in relation to Northern Ireland and Social Justice. Some sources have indicated another possible reason for her departure was a personality clash with Brian Lenihan Jr, who it's suggested feared that she would emerge as an internal rival in his constituency, however, McDonald has strongly denied this was the case. Asked about her participation in Fianna Fáil in 2014, McDonald stated she had been "in the wrong party" and quickly realised that Sinn Féin was a more appropriate party for her Republican views after meeting Sinn Féin members through the Irish National Congress. or, if we wanted to simply leave out the Lenihan thing McDonald started her political career by first joining the Fianna Fáil in 1998, but that she left the party after a year due to core policy differences, particularly in relation to Northern Ireland and Social Justice. Asked about her participation in Fianna Fáil in 2014, McDonald stated she had been "in the wrong party" and quickly realised that Sinn Féin was a more appropriate party for her Republican views after meeting Sinn Féin members through the Irish National Congress. Might that suit? CeltBrowne (talk) 00:07, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * It's quite straightforward. Since Mary Lou McDonald denies the claim, it can't be stated as fact. Neither can her denial be framed as being in some way untrue. So why don't you start suggesting a wording that is policy compliant? FDW777 (talk) 13:53, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * "Since Mary Lou McDonald denies the claim, it can't be stated as fact. Neither can her denial be framed as being in some way untrue." It is not the case that because a politician denies something, Wikipedia cannot contradict it or suggest that it is untrue, as pointed out by the two outside editors who commented on this case via the RfC. Can we please move pass by the 2008 denial? McDonald herself contradicts the 2008 denial in 2014 by stating plainly "I was, in total, in Fianna Fáil for a year". Her 2008 claim is also now quite clearly contradicted by over a dozen journalistic sources. You are giving completely undue weight to the 2008 denial in the context of the overwhelming amount of sources that contradict it, as per WP:Undue. WP:BALANCE has already been linked to you on this point. A dozen reliable sources state one thing, one unreliable source says another. We do not have to defer to the singular unreliable source over all the others.  CeltBrowne (talk) 14:34, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I suggest reading WP:CONLOCAL, you can't overturn the reliability of AP by someone agreeing with you on this page. I also suggest reading the WP:NPOV policy more carefully, Avoid stating seriously contested assertions as facts. If different reliable sources make conflicting assertions about a matter, treat these assertions as opinions rather than facts, and do not present them as direct statements. So how about a policy compliant wording then? The sooner you start, the sooner it gets added in some form. FDW777 (talk) 14:41, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you should read WP:NPOV More carefully. First of all the source of the denial is questionable WP:QS Questionable sources are those that have a poor reputation for checking the facts, lack meaningful editorial oversight, or have an apparent conflict of interest. A Sinn Fein newspaper which exists to promote the Sinn Fein party does not comply with being WP:RELIABLE. Note, "lack meaningful editorial oversight" and "have an apparent conflict of interest" You saying it is reliable over and over again, doesn't change Wikipedia Policy on the matter. Where are all your other sources? Jdaly81 (talk) 01:32, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Except, as I've explained to you repeatedly, per WP:CONLOCAL AP's reliability cannot be overturned by you on this talk page. FDW777 (talk) 14:30, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * This is getting kinda tedious and ignores the fact that her membership of Fianna Fail was part of this page for about 13 years, until edited down and removed completely by one editor, and no attempt to form WP:CONSENSUS. Many politicians have denied things, doesn't mean that it's true, in fact, its laughable we should take that as a standard. An Phoblacht is a questionable source WP:QUESTIONABLE and is the one and only source of her denial. You are saying because she once denied it, we should put equal weight on it, even though in two TV interviews where she confirms membership by being In the wrong party and left after about a year. You are also blatantly ignoring all independent sources here, like the Irish Times where she spoke at the 1998 Fianna Fail ardfeis. As per WP:NPOV, there is only one source about her denial, where there are more than a dozen that override that. The keywords are If different reliable sources make conflicting Where are the multiple reliable sources here that make a conflicting assertion, because we only have the one questionable source. This creates WP:FALSEBALANCE Jdaly81 (talk) 21:26, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

 * No - not as an undisputed fact. If she denies it, it could only be stated if that includes her denial.  Though I haven’t seen her denials, and only see minor mention of apparently brief involvement.  I also don’t think the late 1990s as WP:DUE much space in her biographical article.  Cheers Markbassett (talk) 16:45, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

 * I am happy with McDonald started her political career by first joining the Fianna Fáil in 1998, but that she left the party after a year due to core policy differences, particularly in relation to Northern Ireland and Social Justice. Asked about her participation in Fianna Fáil in 2014, McDonald stated she had been "in the wrong party" and quickly realised that Sinn Féin was a more appropriate party for her Republican views after meeting Sinn Féin members through the Irish National Congress If the user FDW777 wants to add balance, let them add a sentence stating her 2008 denial but be mindful of WP:FALSEBALANCE because of WP:QS Questionable sources are those that have a poor reputation for checking the facts, lack meaningful editorial oversight, or have an apparent conflict of interest. Note "conflict of interest" and "lack of editorial oversight" in regards to An Phoblacht. Jdaly81 (talk) 21:29, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * We could add the following to the end of the above. In a 2008 interview with An Phoblacht[source] she denied being a member of Fianna Fail but admitted to attending numerous Fianna Fáil meetings. Jdaly81 (talk) 21:42, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

 * Include per the evidence provided and the arguments put forward by CeltBrowne. Relevant to the article, factual and backed by multiple sources. ser! (let's discuss it). 04:15, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * It's not factual since it's denied by Mary Lou McDonald. FDW777 (talk) 14:30, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Think about what you said for a second. "It is not a fact because it's denied". Many a politician have denied things, it doesn't mean it's not true especially ignoring the mountain of independent evidence confirming the fact. Why do you continuously ignore all these other sources? Are they all wrong? Jdaly81 (talk) 22:12, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * The subject denying facts backed up by a painstaking plethora of evidence don't make them any less factual ser! (chat to me). 19:31, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Where are we with this? Can you go forward with McDonald started her political career by first joining the Fianna Fáil in 1998, but that she left the party after a year due to core policy differences, particularly in relation to Northern Ireland and Social Justice. Asked about her participation in Fianna Fáil in 2014, McDonald stated she had been "in the wrong party" and quickly realised that Sinn Féin was a more appropriate party for her Republican views after meeting Sinn Féin members through the Irish National Congress Jdaly81 (talk) 12:27, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

 * No, we can't go forward with this. As explained repeatedly, you cannot state as fact something Mary Lou McDonald denies. Feel free to suggest a wording that doesn't do that. FDW777 (talk) 14:30, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I just did. If you want to append her denial to the end, that is fine. But it seems any suggested wording won't be acceptable to you, apart from just mentioning her denial only, while we are not able to mention her joining Fianna Fail. Also, you never addressed that APhoblacht is a WP:QS as per policy Questionable sources are those that have a poor reputation for checking the facts, lack meaningful editorial oversight, or have an apparent conflict of interest. Note "conflict of interest" and "lack of editorial oversight" in regards to An Phoblacht. What is your suggestion for wording? Jdaly81 (talk) 22:12, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I did address AP, repeatedly. Per WP:CONLOCAL you cannot determine it to be unreliable on this page. Ignoring that fact is disruptive. FDW777 (talk) 07:56, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

 * Include There are several reliable sources that pointed out that she was a member of Fianna Fail.Sea Ane (talk) 23:10, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

 * Again, as there are no new suggestions of wording being put forward, nor any new genuine attempt to work out a suggestion, can we move forward with the suggestion myself and CeltBrowne put forward? May I also remind editors of WP:Stonewalling Jdaly81 (talk) 23:59, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

 * I'm not stonewalling. I've repeatedly asked for you to provide a wording that doesn't state as fact something Mary Lou McDonald denies. Once you do, it could be added to the article. FDW777 (talk) 07:56, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

 * Again, no suggestion put forward. Jdaly81 (talk) 12:21, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

 * My course of action, for now, will be to continue to wait for outside editors to comment on this case as the recommended length of time for an RfC is at least 2 to 3 weeks. I think we should respect the consensus that emerges out of those comments. If that consensus is not acknowledged, the RfC can be referred onto WP:ANC who can make a formal ruling on what consensus the RfC has produced. However, I would also note that the RfC does not require a formal ruling in the event of a clear consensus, and so far, the input from outsider editors is trending distinctly in one direction. CeltBrowne (talk) 09:32, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

 * OK, that is fair enough. The RFC around over a week at this stage, so willing to give it another bit of time. Jdaly81 (talk) 12:21, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

 * Include - Per reliable sources from CeltBrowne and Jdaly81, showing without a doubt that she was in FF for over a year. The 2008 denial is not worth much, as McDonald contradicted herself in 2014. All should be included in the text. Spleodrach (talk) 12:05, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Include Reliable sources report that she was a member of FF. If reliable sources also report that McDonald denies that she was a member of FF then we can include that too. --RaiderAspect (talk) 13:03, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Also, FDW777, An Phoblacht is listed as unreliable at WP:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. --RaiderAspect (talk) 14:41, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * No it isn't, read it properly. It's "generally unreliable for news reporting", but can be used in an WP:ABOUTSELF context as stated (including by yourself in the RFC we both participated in). FDW777 (talk) 14:53, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * The ABOUTSELF exception is only for uncontroversial matters. I'm actually sympathetic towards using it more widely, but most people don't want to create a de-facto right of reply. --RaiderAspect (talk) 03:58, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Uncontroversial would be saying she never attended any meetings, which isn't what she said. FDW777 (talk) 17:18, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

 * Include - Although it should be apparent from my above comments, I'm just formally listing myself in the include section. See above for my rationale. CeltBrowne (talk) 15:47, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Include - The Irish Independent in 2015 was crystal clear, for example. She joined, with full visibility, family support, etc., won an office at local level, was a delegate to the national conference already in her first year. Given this from a RS, to claim that it can't be included because of a purported denial by the person is nonsense - false "balance". And anyway the "year in FF" was acknowledged by the subject in 2014, so I am puzzled as to why there is any debate on the basics. Exact wording, sure, let's do it carefully, but after this much time, we should move on to that, the first question appears settled. SeoR (talk) 21:53, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Most people agree it can be included, but a request for neutral wording from those wanting to include the information has been repeatedly ignored, with a stubborn insistence that it should be stated as fact rather than "carefully" as you suggest. FDW777 (talk) 17:22, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

 * In fairness, suggestions were put forward but they were rejected by you. As you can see, overwhelmingly people agree to include it as there is a flood of reputable sources that state that Mary-Lou was indeed a member of Fianna Fail. That is settled now as a fact per this RFC. If her denial in An Phoblacht needs to be added as a postfix to it, then fine. My suggestion McDonald started her political career by first joining the Fianna Fáil in 1998, but that she left the party after a year due to core policy differences, particularly in relation to Northern Ireland and Social Justice. Asked about her participation in Fianna Fáil in 2014, McDonald stated she had been "in the wrong party" and quickly realised that Sinn Féin was a more appropriate party for her Republican views after meeting Sinn Féin members through the Irish National Congres. Feel free to add to this. Jdaly81 (talk) 00:55, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Include per the reliable sources presented above. Idealigic (talk) 16:16, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Now that we have consensus on her membership of Fianna Fail, can we talk about the wording of this? My suggestion. McDonald started her political career by first joining the Fianna Fáil in 1998, but that she left the party after a year due to core policy differences, particularly in relation to Northern Ireland and Social Justice. Asked about her participation in Fianna Fáil in 2014, McDonald stated she had been "in the wrong party" and quickly realised that Sinn Féin was a more appropriate party for her Republican views after meeting Sinn Féin members through the Irish National Congress Jdaly81 (talk)

title: Talk:Mary Lou McDonald


text:
Politics and government of Nuevo León

The governmental structures of Nuevo León, a Mexican state, are organized according to article 30 of the state constitution, which provides for a republican, representative and popular government, divided into three independent branches (executive, legislative and judicial) that cannot be joined together in a single person or institution. Nuevo León's relation with the federal government of Mexico places it in a similar relation to that federal government as any other Mexican state, but it retains certain aspects of sovereignty with respect to other Mexican states and even toward foreign countries, especially with reference to its own internal affairs.

Executive power
Executive power rests in a governor, who is directly elected by the citizens, using a secret ballot, to a 6-year term with no possibility of reelection. The position is open only to a Mexican citizen by birth, at least 30 years old with at least 5 years residency in Nuevo León. , the office is held by Samuel García Sepúlveda of the Citizen's Movement. The executive branch includes various institutions, which can be divided into two basic types: centralized public administration and parastatal public administration. Centralized public administration consists of the state-level secretaries of departments, statewide procurement, and their subordinates. Parastatal public administration consists of decentralized public entities, such as enterprises in which the state government has majority control and public trusteeships.

Nuevo León has not always had a democratically elected governor; see Governors of Nuevo León.

Legislative power
Legislative power rests in a unicameral legislature composed of 42 deputies, also elected via secret ballot by the citizenry, 26 of whom are directly elected and 16 chosen according to a plurinominal system involving proportional representation. the LXXI Legislature of Nuevo León consists of 15 PRI deputies, 22 PAN deputies, 2 from PT, 2 from PANAL and 1 from PRD. To become a deputy, one must be a Mexican citizen by birth, at least 21 years old with at least 5 years residency in Nuevo León.

Judicial power
Judicial power is invested in the Superior Court of Justice of Nuevo León, along with 7 ministers elected to a Consejo de la Judicatura for a term of 10 years, with the possibility of succeeding themselves once. These are elected by the state congress from a list presented by the governor. The Tribunal and the Council supervise 12 judicial districts. Membership of the Tribunal is limited to Mexican citizens by birth, at least 35 years old, with at least ten years practicing law with the title of Licenciado en Derecho, and at least 5 years residency in Nuevo León. The Presiding Minister Gustavo Adolfo Guerrero Gutiérrez was elected on August 1, 2007.

Political parties
In accord with article 40 of the State Electoral Law, official recognition of a political party is determined by the State Electoral Commission only after verifying that the party has received 1.5% or more of the votes in a local election. , the recognized parties are PRI, PAN, PRD, PVEM, PT and CD.

Municipalities
Nuevo León consists of 51 autonomous municipalities, each headed by a mayor ('presidente municipal / alcalde) with a 3-year term; mayors can serve no more than two consecutive terms. Mayors must be Mexican citizens by birth, at least 21 years old with at least one-year residency in the municipality. , the municipalities are:
 * Abasolo
 * Agualeguas
 * Los Aldamas
 * Allende
 * Anáhuac
 * Apodaca
 * Aramberri
 * Bustamante
 * Cadereyta Jiménez
 * El Carmen
 * Cerralvo
 * China
 * Ciénega de Flores
 * Doctor Arroyo
 * Doctor Coss
 * Doctor González
 * Escobedo
 * Galeana
 * García
 * General Bravo
 * General Terán
 * General Treviño
 * Guadalupe
 * Los Herreras
 * Hidalgo
 * Higueras
 * Hualahuises
 * Iturbide
 * Juárez
 * Lampazos de Naranjo
 * Linares
 * Marín
 * Melchor Ocampo
 * Mier y Noriega
 * Mina
 * Montemorelos
 * Monterrey (capital)
 * Parás
 * Pesquería
 * Los Ramones
 * Rayones
 * Sabinas Hidalgo
 * Salinas Victoria
 * San Nicolás de los Garza
 * San Pedro Garza García
 * Santa Catarina
 * Santiago
 * Vallecillo
 * Villaldama
 * Zaragoza
 * General Zuazua.

Citizenship
According to the state constitution, a Nuevoleonese citizen is a person who was either born in Nuevo León or a Mexican citizen who has maintained residency in the state for more than two years and has not indicated to the municipal authorities a desire to preserve his/her previous citizenship. Citizenship can be lost or suspended, among other reasons, for being or becoming a Mexican army officer in charge of federal troops entering or stationed inside the state borders or for committing certain crimes. Noble titles are not recognized and individual rights and freedoms are protected by the Title I of the state constitution.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Politics and government of Nuevo León


text:
User talk:198.26.118.36

Proposed deletion of Aero Spacelines Mini Guppy

The article Aero Spacelines Mini Guppy has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "No references, this article fails GNG"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

''' This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. ''' Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

title: User talk:198.26.118.36


text:
Talk:Autonomy

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 January 2019 and 16 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Rvelez313.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 17:43, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 August 2019 and 12 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Claytmcc.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 17:43, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Caitlin.mady, M.sansom, Sydneyrguindon, Dimitrimarinis, Matchapapi.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 15:04, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Typo in introduction
the introduction says: "respect for the autonomy of patients is an important goalas deontology"

"goalas" is clearly part of the typo here but I am not sure what the sentence is intended to say. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.63.212.58 (talk) 01:20, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

the statement was wrong anyway, unsourced I cannot see what was originally meant BUT deontology means ethically correct from the outside pressure of a god, rule or system. So autonomy cannot be deontological by definition. PERHAPS the original text said something like the Hippocratic oath is a deontology which paradoxically grants patients autonomy. But that is just my speculation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.33.19.171 (talk) 17:04, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Expansion of Autonomy and Medicine section
The Medicine section can be further fleshed out, particularly with more global understandings of medical autonomy. Would creating an article dedicated to the topic be warranted? Khanzar (talk) 19:09, 10 September 2015 (UTC)Khanzar

Clarification
I am having a problem, perhaps someone could assist me ....

Its mentioned in the article

"Autonomy is not independence"

Random House dictionary

au•ton•o•my   (ô ton‚ƒ mŽ)  n., pl. -mies
 * 1. independence or freedom, as of the will or one's actions.
 * 2. the condition of being autonomous; self-government or the right of self-government; independence.
 * 3. a self-governing community. [1615–25; < Gk]

Thank you chance0 April 23, 2005

Kurdistan
Kurdistan officially does not hold any autonomy!

Autonomy is
Autonomy includes in its very concept the idea of pratical or material independence. Although one can say, as a stoic, that it is possible to be autonomous without actual freedom, it is not, because the human thinking and desiring is not at all without purpose and the one who wishes hopes to realize. Autonomy as a principle, rooted in human nature as generally we have in the iluminism and mostly in the liberalism, is not a concept in the realm of the wishfull thinking, it aims actual realization and was an instrument to criticize authoritarianism of pre-capitalist societies. It is a up to date problem how to organize human collectives with actual individual autonomy, specially if we consider the huge problem of free choice, free expression and free acting in the real realm of production, distribution and consume, that is, in economy. Most of the main contemporary authors that write about freedom and autonomy disguise this question and only consider autonomy in the realm of dialogue, politics or reason.

Paulo Fleury - 01/08/2006

the above is not very clearly written or particularly explanatory, it should be re-written 13:43, 21 November 2006 (UTC)robat

AFD result - keep
 Rob ert  00:20, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

"Space Section" Renaming
The space section of this article seems to be basically about robotics and AI.

So scholars would rename the section "Artificial Intelligence" with a subheading for space.

However there isn't enough information there for artificial intelligence, since most of it is about space.

Also, according to Manual of Style " Autonomy in Space does not relate to the socio-political definitions, here we are talking about a device that can make basic or convoluted decisions based on LOGIC (in an electronic usage), the X37b Military Space Plane is a great example!" isn't phrased correctly due to the "we" and the "!"

I will change this if not corrected in 30 days, so the author has time to correct this grammar and functional error α_MCCCXXXVII_† 21:24, 18 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alpha1337Saint (talk • contribs)
 * I will find some examples but it is poor taxonomy to have the section labelled space and then contain other usage. Space is a subset of "autonomous" robotics JPelham (talk) 13:12, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Hot Topic in Science R&D
Autonomy is being distinguished from traditional autonomous systems by Defense Agencies as being able to collect data, analyze, and solve complex problems without human intervention; that is, they look to emulate human cognition and decision making. Traditional autonomous systems have very specific functions based completely on predefined and programmed inputs without the ability to handle complex disturbances.

Autonomy and its use in intelligent systems and cognitive models is becoming a major theme inside such circles. Additionally, it is a key component of advance manufacturing techniques including "big data", "visual cueing" and "sensing"

My point is, the term autonomy is becoming far more commonly used as a science and technology term than is currently being explained in this article as an afterthought of space technology. I'd argue its place in science and technology is far more important than its place in the liberal science disciplines.

At the very least, their should be links towards autonomous robots, thought autonomy (S&T sense) doesn't refer just to robots, but any system (software, static sensors, etc)

If I have time, I'll try and work on this but I hope some people more knowledgeable in the field of autonomy (S&T sense), can work on it.

-JK — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.238.51.131 (talk) 15:28, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Autonomy. 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/20101008165230/http://www.encontroanpocs.org.br/2006/lista_gt.asp?atvid=26&entid=66 to http://www.encontroanpocs.org.br/2006/lista_gt.asp?atvid=26&entid=66
 * Added tag to http://www.sbsociologia.com.br/congresso_v02/papers/GT3%20Ci
 * Added tag to http://www.flacsoandes.org/dspace/bitstream/10469/382/1/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:44, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

The Piaget section is in need of editing
There are sentence construction issues and missing words throughout the section on Piaget. I would edit it if I weren't only here to learn about autonomy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:241:8103:C2E0:6233:4BFF:FE16:6ED (talk) 17:07, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

This is a curious comment in the Introduction:
''"It has been discovered by scientists that autonomy is human capacity to free will, the center for autonomy is completely independent from circumstance or environment." ''

When was this "discovered" and who discovered it? It seems to me this is an interpretive opinion, not a scientific fact or conclusion. --75.67.75.112 (talk) 01:40, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Religion section
The "Religion" section, beginning with the paragraph before "The disestablishment process" through the end of that sub-section, has some curious opinions. It is based heavily on a single, offline source by Philip E. Hammond. It involves a novel theory of "three disestablishments", and is Protestant-centric. I am not sure why it needs to be in this broad-topic article at all. 2600:8800:1880:9A3:5604:A6FF:FE38:4B26 (talk) 05:50, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Also the religion section is very Christian heavy, other religions have views about autonomy, they might not be as western oriented but they would still be applicable for this section.--A-humble-friend (talk) 19:57, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Autonomy
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Autonomy's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "DD": From Åland Islands: [http://www.sudd.ch/event.php?lang=en&id=ax011994 Åland-Inseln (Finnland), 20. November 1994 : Beitritt zur EU] Direct Democracy From United States:

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Artificial Intelligence Autonomy
Would discussing the role of autonomy in artificial intelligence and autonomous weapon systems be a good addition to this page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by FinnSoThin (talk • contribs) 01:33, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

 * I think mentioning these topics would be good if backed by reliable sources. However, they do not merrit a section on their own. They could be added to the list in Autonomy, which already covers artificial intelligence in terms of robotics. Phlsph7 (talk) 04:06, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Autonomy


text: File:The Offspring Splinter.jpg

title: File:The Offspring Splinter.jpg