Talk:Mountjoy Prison helicopter escape

GA on hold

Hi there, I have reviewed this article against the Wikipedia:good article criteria and although I am not quite prepared to pass the article for GA immediately, I don't think there is a long way to go. I have listed below the principle problems which prevent this article from achieving GA status and I have also appended a list of other comments which, whilst they are not essential for GA, may help in the future development of the article. The article now has seven days to address these issues, and should the contributors disagree with my comments then please indicate below why you disagree and suggest a solution, compromise or explanation. Further time will be granted if a concerted effort is being made to address the problems, and as long as somebody is genuinely trying to deal with the issues raised then I will not fail the article. I am aware that my standards are quite high, but I feel that an article deserves as thorough a review as possible when applying for GA and that a tough review process here is an important stepping stone to future FAC attempts. Please do not take offence at anything I have said, nothing is meant personally and maliciously and if anyone feels aggrieved then please notify me at once and I will attempt to clarify the comments in question. Finally, should anyone disagree with my review or eventual decision then please take the article to WP:GAR to allow a wider selection of editors to comment on the issues discussed here. Well done on the work so far.

Issues preventing promotion

(These issues must be satisfactorily addressed, in the article itself or here, before GA promotion can go ahead)

• I assume that when you say the word "government" you ar talking about the Irish government, but given that the IRA was a cross-border issue it might be better to claify "Irish" or "British".

• Which particular use of "government" are you worried about? It's not used that often, and when it is it seems relatively clear to me. If I'm missing something obvious, just say! One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 19:42, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

The one which stood out was in the lead. Looking at it again, you've got the Irish music charts just before it, so I'll leave it as it is.--Jackyd101 (talk) 19:54, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

• Some prose needs looking at again in a few places: Some examples below.

• "that sought to end Northern Ireland's status within the United Kingdom" - this doesn't make it clear what the problem with NI's status is. Either give a short, simple explination or perhaps substitute "status" for "membership" or similar.

• Done, assuming you're happy with it? One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 19:42, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

• "The IRA began making plans to break Twomey, O'Hagan and Mallon out of the prison." - when? Can you provide a little more context here?

• It doesn't say as such. Twomey was imprisoned in September and they escaped at the end of October. When you take into account the abortive previous escape and the time required to plan the helicopter escape, you'd expect it to be almost straight away. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 19:42, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll insert the word immediately in there then if its not a problem.

Fine by me. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 20:09, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Other comments

(These comments are not essential to passing GAN)

• Do (or should) O'Hagan and Mallon have their own articles? The IRA clearly thought they were important at the time. If they do have them then link, if they don't then consider creating them. Twomey should also be linked when he appears in the main text for the first time as well as the lead (as should the Wolfe Tones and the Helicopter Song).

These are all fairly minor issues, and I'm sure that it won't take very long to deal with them. Congratulations, this is a very good article and once the above are addressed I will be very happy to pass it.--Jackyd101 (talk) 19:25, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Mallon is unlikely, though possible. O'Hagan is slightly more possible. The problem with Mallon is the information is very patchy, for example it's unclear what he was imprisoned for in the first place, although as it was in the RoI it was most likely to be IRA membership or arms possession. Then the information is a bit clearer for a few years while he's in and out of prison, it's unknown (at least in the sources I have access to) when he was actually released from prison, although he pops up again in the early-mid 80s as allegedly being involved in the Shergar kidnap. Both of them are covered more in relation to the Border Campaign which they were both involved in. Looking at the material I have access to which is plenty, I wouldn't really recommend writing articles on either. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 19:47, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough.--Jackyd101 (talk) 19:54, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

It good, I'm going to pass it.--Jackyd101 (talk) 19:57, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 20:05, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Edits by Rigger30

His failings of NPOV over the erroneous use of "terrorist" are being discussed, suffice to say he says "The only definition that applies is the one used in Irish law contained in the Offences Against the State Act 1939" which would obviously rule out his own definition of "terrorist" since it does not appear in the act.

He claims he "Corrected name of the prison to it's official name not the one used by . . . IRA". This is not correct. Long Kesh was its name when it was an internment camp, and even after the name change it was still called that by loyalists in addition to republicans. In the early 1970s there was no plan to free Gerry Adams from HM Maze Prison because he was not in a prison, he was at Long Kesh internment camp. He was not imprisoned, he was interned without trial.

He claims "Irish charts no evidence of this song topping it. Also never banned never listed in Iris Oifigiuil as banned by censor of publications". Searching for "helicopter" for the song title on this website shows it charted on 22 November 1973, reached number 1 in the charts, and was in the charts for 8 weeks. That is in addition to the book already cited in the main body of the article. The Times confirm the song was banned, in addition to the book already cited in the main body of the article.

His rationale for removal of the internment comparison is also dubious. There is no defence to an accusation of IRA membership by a superintendent in the Garda Síochána. They do not have to supply any evidence to support their accusation, their word is automatically accepted by the juryless court and a minimum of one-year of imprisonment is the mandatory sentence. That is why the book correctly points out it was internment in all but name, as simply by making an accusation (without needing a shred of evidence to back it up) people could be imprisoned. O Fenian (talk) 21:57, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Anyone should just read the foregoing and make up their own mind about POV. The IRA are terrorists plain and simple. Nothing will change that. My belief is that the article originally had a POV which slanted in favour of the IRA I tried to remedy that. How anyone can equate terrorists with the forces of law and order and want to use neutral language for fear of offending them is beyond me. They were responsible for starting a conflict which led to the deaths of over 3,500 people and this is an undisputed fact. Using semantics and language to try and cover up these facts won't change them. Rigger30 (talk) 20:04, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry but I for one and I'm sure that are many other would like to dispute that undisputed fact. So just by me saying that makes your statement above invalid. Bjmullan (talk) 21:09, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

There are many who seem to think the IRA are saints or some form of higher mortals. They started a conflict in which 3,500 people at least lost their lives. There are many sources for this including Lost Lives by McKitterick and others. Deny if ye like but they are terrorists and they did kill people. Nothing will chancge that. Of course yours is another example of the useless pedantic arguments where ye start nitpicking to prove the unprovable. Rigger30 (talk) 10:37, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Mountjoy Prison helicopter escape/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

rated as: B-class for quality, because it' comprehensive and well-written, and it's a good article nominee; mid-importance because it is probably the best-known prison escape in the Republic of Ireland, and entered into popular culture --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:38, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 12:59, 19 June 2011 (UTC). Substituted at 00:33, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mountjoy Prison helicopter escape. 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/20110514081327/http://historical-debates.oireachtas.ie/D/0268/D.0268.197311010007.html to http://historical-debates.oireachtas.ie/D/0268/D.0268.197311010007.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 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) 03:40, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Banned

Since page 132, which is already cited at the end of the sentence, says Based on the exploits of that Halloween night, it was immediately banned, perhaps someone could explain why another citation could possibly be needed? FDW777 (talk) 20:43, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

'Banned' song

In the text:

Irish rebel band the Wolfe Tones wrote a song celebrating the escape called "The Helicopter Song", which was immediately banned by the government yet still topped the Irish popular music charts after selling twelve thousand copies in a single week.

the phrase "immediately banned by the government" needs to be both clarified and then explicitly cited, yet my tags to that effect have twice been removed, and I have falsely been accused of "tag bombing" and, contrary to Wikipedia policy, told that I must research the matter myself.

There are many kinds of banning (for a song, these include: it is illegal to play it on the radio; it is formally prohibited to play it on state radio; informal pressure is used to stop it being played on state radio; is illegal to play it at all; it's legal to perform it; it's illegal to own a recording; it's illegal to own a written copy of the lyrics; etc.). And yet the nature of the supposed "ban" is not explained, and nor is how the recording could top the charts if it was banned. The word "immediately" is vague, and again there is no explanation of how 12,000 copies were sold when it was purportedly thus banned; or perhaps the ban was not, in fact "immediate"?. There is no explanation of the mechanism for the ban, or whether it was brought about by an act of the Dáil, a court order, a ministerial decree, or in some other way. It is also not stated whether the ban is is still in place, and either how it was rescinded, or whether (and how, in the digital age), it is currently enforced, or not.

Until such time as these points are clarified, the tags should be restored. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:16, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

It is explicitly cited, as explained above at #Banned which you ignored completely and started this section. If you want further information, you are welcome to research it yourself. FDW777 (talk) 17:26, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Also, the information you demand is completely outside the scope of this article. Whether the song is still banned in 2021 and how it is policed in the digital age are not relevant to an article about a 1973 prison escape. FDW777 (talk) 17:40, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

• "contrary to Wikipedia policy, told that I must research the matter myself."
• "both clarified and then explicitly cited"

-- Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:46, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

I refuse to provide references for material that isn't in the article. Where in WP:V, or any other policy, does it say they are needed for material that is not in the article? FDW777 (talk) 21:18, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Adding {{citation needed|date=February 2021}} adds this article to Category:Articles with unsourced statements from February 2021. The problem of course being there are no unreferenced statements in the article. FDW777 (talk) 21:36, 16 February 2021 (UTC)