[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/Jump to content

Talk:Robin Jackson

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

Sources and inline citations

[edit]

All allegations made in the article have been sourced, with inline citations provided.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:50, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Regular Army too ambiguous

[edit]

The source says British Army so it should be used. Regular Army is confusing for readers as it doesn't specify which army we are referring to. British? Irish?--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 06:27, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence mentions the Army, RUC and UDR. The UDR was a regiment of the British Army, do it doesn't make sense to say "British Army, RUC and UDR". Hence "regular Army". It should be obvious which army is being referred to, as the Glenanne gang operated in Northern Ireland. How about regular Army? Mooretwin (talk) 14:08, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That'll work. The reason I brought it up is because while you and I know that the UDR was a regiment of the British Army, not everybody does. Thanks for your suggestion.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:52, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've pipelinked regular army. --Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:54, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jackson's poultry lorry

[edit]
Resolved

Nothing is mentioned about Jackson's poultry lorry after the bombs were allegedly transferred into the car boots. I presume a UVF member drove it back across the border while Jackson, Hanna and the others made their way into Dublin city centre. None of the sources mention it. I wonder if Justice Barron questioned this omission in the account of events for 17 May 1974?--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:59, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that this lorry of his was used to carry out other attacks including the William Strathearn killing in 1977. I'm still wondering, though, why nobody questioned how it got back to Northern Ireland after the bombs were loaded into the bomb cars.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 10:01, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have since discovered that Jackson and Hanna headed back to Northern Ireland in Jackson's poultry lorry before 4.00 p.m. whilst the bombs were still unexploded. I have now added the information to the article with the citation and source.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 08:07, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Northern Irish loyalist or Ulster loyalist

[edit]

There appears to be an edit war brewing on this page as to whether Jackson should be described as a Northern Irish loyalist or Ulster loyalist. IMO, the former is more accurate seeing as the state is known as Northern Ireland not Ulster. Additionally, a person's nationality should be identified in the lead.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 10:35, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Ulster loyalism is the term for the ideology (one need not be Northern Irish to be an Ulster loyalist), so stating "is an Ulster loyalist" without any mention of nationality is incorrect. I think the best course of action is to have "is a Northern Irish loyalist" with the two terms linked separately. That's "silly" though, apparently. JonChappleTalk 10:42, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Northern Irish" would make more sense, and as it was recently stated by an administrator that Northern Irish can be used as it simply means someone from Northern Ireland and nothing else, there is nothing wrong with using it.
However i don't see why we can;t use "British loyalist", seeing as British is an actual nationality, and well what are loyalists basically loyal too? Mabuska (talk) 11:31, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I see where you're coming from, but in common worldwide English usage British Loyalist tends to refer to loyalists in the American War of Independence. Also, some Ulster loyalists have had enough of the union and are loyal to Ulster only, so it could be a tricky area. If we don't want to use "Northern Irish", "... loyalist from Northern Ireland" could work too, although it's clumsier. JonChappleTalk 11:36, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Clumsier but more accurate than Ulster loyalist which is simply an ideology. Mabuska (talk) 12:03, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If one's from Northern Ireland & prefers NI to remain in the United Kingdom? then one's a British loyalist. Anyways, as for the usage of Northern Irish? it's acceptable, as we use English, Welsh & Scottish. GoodDay (talk) 11:52, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Northern Irish is not a nationality. Mo ainm~Talk 13:12, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately 84 per cent of a certain non-country would disagree with you. JonChappleTalk 13:20, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Where does it state that Northern Irish is a nationality and just what someone describes themselves as? Mo ainm~Talk 13:24, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"And thinking about each of these national identities in turn, how strongly do you feel yourself to be Northern Irish?" JonChappleTalk 13:29, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
identities being the word, what someone identifies at doesn't make it a nationality. Mo ainm~Talk 13:31, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It does when it says national identity, i.e. the act of identifying with a nation or state. If it had meant a general, non-national identity like, say, golfers or people who wear glasses, the question wouldn't have asked for a national identity. JonChappleTalk 13:35, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't use Northern Irish, then use British. He's certainly not Irish. GoodDay (talk) 13:32, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that option's on the table. JonChappleTalk 13:36, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"An Ulster loyalist from Northern Ireland" is fine. It tells us what he is and wher he's from without stamping a "nationality" on him. ~Asarlaí 13:43, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
But that's unecessarily verbose when just Northern Irish loyalist should suffice. They are basically saying the same thing.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 13:53, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't agree it is saying the same thing. Mo ainm~Talk 13:55, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
OK. The way I see it we've got four options here. To avoid edit warring we need to settle on one of these: # Northern Irish loyalist. (My choice as it's the most concise but I'm more than willing to compromise) # Ulster loyalist from Northern Ireland. A bit verbose but a suitable alternative to the former. #Ulster loyalist. It's Jackson's idealogy, doesn't say whether or not he's from Northern Ireland. # British. Technically and legally correct, as Jackson would have considered himself such and did go to great lengths to ensure that this was maintained; however, the lead needs to specify Northern Ireland as British loyalist does have American Revolutionary War connotations.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:07, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In this case I would go with British as I'm pretty certain that's how he would self identify. Mo ainm~Talk 14:12, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And just omit to mention he's from Northern Ireland altogether? I'd go for #1, with a very weak support for #2. Mo, I think you're over-complicating the "Northern Irish" issue. JonChappleTalk 14:16, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Northern Ireland should definitely be in the opening line.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:18, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Northern Irish is an ethnicity and per openpara shouldn't be in the lead. Mo ainm~Talk 14:23, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Then I guess I'll have to opt for Ulster loyalist from Northern Ireland.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:27, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In that case neither should "Irish (linking to Irish people)", and you've got your work cut out for you if you want to sort that one out. In any case, Northern Irish is hardly an ethnicity – ethnically-homogenous states don't experience three decades-long sectarian bloodshed. That very statement in itself defies belief. JonChappleTalk 14:29, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
We don't make assumptions Mo ainm as to how they'd self-identify. Also since when Northern Irish an ethnicity to you? I thought it wasn't? Anyways ethnicity can be stated if its relevant to the article or the subject of it. Regardless of that an admin stated Northern Irish means simply someone from Northern Ireland as does the article People of Northern Ireland. Mabuska (talk) 14:42, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Heck, just go with British loyalist. Afterall, NI is within the UK & Jackson wished it to remain so. GoodDay (talk) 14:45, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It is particulary important to state "x is a Northern Ireland loyalist ..." in this context. It is accurate, within policy, and tells the reader what s/he needs to know far better than any other opening description, which is what matters most. Daicaregos (talk) 15:09, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Northern Ireland loyalist is what I had used originally when I created the article; I later changed it to Northern Irish loyalist.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:12, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
@Mabuska, and an editor said it wasn't, admins are not the be all and end all just because one says so doesn't make it so no more than any other editor on Wikipedia. Mo ainm~Talk
"A Northern Ireland loyalist" isn't grammatical. It doesn't make any sense. What next – France politicans? China warlords? Turkey athletes? Italy chefs? JonChappleTalk 15:20, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That is exactly why I changed it to Northern Irish loyalist. Northern Ireland loyalist looked odd. The fact of the matter is that whether or not Northern Irish is a nationality, Northern Ireland as a state does exist, hence it's perfecctly reasonable to call a loyalist Northern Irish.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 17:14, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Northern Irish does simply mean someone from Northern Ireland afterall and nothing else. Mabuska (talk) 17:26, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly, which is why I believe it should be used here to describe Jackson.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 18:52, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I have been convinced. Thank you. You guys are correct, and I am not. "x is a Northern Irish loyalist ..." is how the intro should be phrased. Daicaregos (talk) 19:34, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Are you being facetious? Sarcasm isn't easy to detect over the internet. JonChappleTalk 19:42, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No. I was not being sarcastic. It is possible to have one's mind swayed by argument, and mine was. Although I can see how it may have looked like sarcasm. Daicaregos (talk) 07:34, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Seeing as Northern Irish loyalist isn't restricted to being a unionist, it's a good fit. GoodDay (talk) 19:44, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. There are loyalists that want an independent Northern Ireland (presumably called Ulster), so it's the best way. JonChappleTalk 20:02, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Northern Irish links to the article which says that 29% of the people of Northern Ireland refer to themselves as Northern Irish, so the usage is not out of place in this article and should be retained in the opening line coupled with loyalist which is pipelinked to Ulster loyalism.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 08:27, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like we've a consensus for Northern Irish loyalist. GoodDay (talk) 09:44, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. There are five editors who support the description Northern Irish loyalist (Jonchapple, Daicaregos, Mabuska, you and I) and two who are against it (Mo ainm and Asarlai).--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 12:43, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The SAS training him abroad? Source? Also, Hayes 2005; I can't definitively state that a book about Japanese porn and hookers doesn't contain scholarly information about the security forces in Northern Ireland, but....really? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prairie-five-oh (talk • contribs) 01:20, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Hayes source I provided covers the SAS allegation. And have you read Hayes book? If not, then your comment is merely your own opinion.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 08:58, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have read the portion in question and this source does not fulfill the requirements of WP: Verifiability, ie. "exceptional claims require exceptional sources". The "source" is in fact an extended footnote which makes a number of contentious and far-reaching claims which are not backed up. It also refers to the book "The Committee", another dubious work whose main source, Jim Sands, has admitted to hoaxing, and whose remaining other was a drunken Scottish hitchhiker. This article appears at first sight to be well sourced, but inspection reveals a number of alarming shortcomings, eg. the presence of personal blogs, self-published works, tabloid newspapers, and those which "rely heavily on rumor and personal opinion" to quote WP: Questionable Sources. Also, it goes without saying that if the Irish Times is the source, then the link should be from the Irish Times, not "Sex and Sleaze in Modern Japan". Shipyard Special (talk) 16:47, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Shipyard, you're doing a pretty good job of throwing your weight around on article talk pages seeing as you've only become a Wikipedia user two months ago. This article is in fact well-sourced and it is only you who have objections to them. This page has been up since 2009.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 17:16, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Jeanne boleyn: please do not make personal attacks on me. Please do not rush off to other users talk pages to tell them to "watch out" for me. Also, if you think I am operating a sock puppet account, you can use http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:SSP to check this out.
This is not based on my "opinion" as you stated in your revert. It is based on the rules by which Wikipedia is run http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:EXCEPTIONAL, quote:

Any exceptional claim requires multiple high-quality sources.[10] Red flags that should prompt extra caution include:

surprising or apparently important claims not covered by multiple mainstream sources, challenged claims that are supported purely by primary or self-published sources or those with an apparent conflict of interest, reports of a statement by someone that seems out of character, or against an interest they had previously defended, claims that are contradicted by the prevailing view within the relevant community, or that would significantly alter mainstream assumptions, especially in science, medicine, history, politics, and biographies of living people. This is especially true when proponents say there is a conspiracy to silence them.

and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:PUS:

In general, any tabloid newspaper, television show, or site, such as The Sun, The Daily Mirror, The Register, and so on, should not be used when a more respected, mainstream source exists.

Plus the whole of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:UNDUE is worth reading when it comes to how some parts of the article are phrased ("Psychological warfare operative Major Colin Wallace confirmed the allegations"; "The UVF, at a secret meeting with journalists, confirmed that he had no hand in Sergeant Campbell's death") for one thing. As for your assertion that the article is well-sourced, it is currently rated as B-class. Finally, with regard to my time on WP, it goes without saying: anyone can edit Wikipedia.Shipyard Special (talk) 16:22, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Source for Private Eye

[edit]

"An article by Paul Foot in Private Eye suggested that Jackson led one of the teams that bombed Dublin on 17 May 1974, killing 26 people, including two infants. Royal Ulster Constabulary Special Patrol Group (SPG) officer John Weir, himself a convicted murderer, also maintained this in an affidavit. The information from Weir's affidavit was published in 2003 in the Barron Report, which was the findings of an official investigation into the Dublin bombings commissioned by Irish Supreme Court Justice Henry Barron. Journalist Kevin Dowling in the Irish Independent alleged that Jackson had headed the gang that perpetrated the Miami Showband killings, which left three members of the cabaret band dead and two wounded. Journalist Joe Tiernan and the Pat Finucane Centre alleged this as well as Jackson's involvement in the Dublin bombings. When questioned about the latter, Jackson denied involvement. Findings noted in a report by the Historical Enquiries Team (HET) (released in December 2011) confirmed that Jackson was linked to the Miami Showband attack through his fingerprints which had been found on the silencer specifically made for the Luger pistol used in the shootings."

Where are the sources for this paragraph? Zoidberg262 (talk) 17:25, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would advise both Zoidberg and Jeanne to stop reverting as this article is under 1RR which has been breached. Mo ainm~Talk 00:33, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I only reverted once, Mo. My other edit was to fix a ref.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 09:14, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I made no reversions as defined by Wikipedia, I made changes (removing unsourced, not referenced material), my changes were then reverted. So much for Wikipedia being a 'free' and 'open' platform, I am being prevented, threatened and abused, for making legitimate edits. Further threats are made citing 1RR, when clearly the very policies cited are not understood. I have made 0 reversions. Zoidberg262 (talk) 14:56, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The source you are seeking is in the article's main body although I shall now add it to the lead. Bear in mind the lead is only a summary and doesn't really require dup refs if they are already given elsewhere. Nobody is threatening you here.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:04, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You have a good point and it might be a good idea for controversial articles; however, it's not required if they are cited in the article's main body.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:42, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References

[edit]

I need help in fixing the refs. I've beem working for over an hour trying to repair them to no avail.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 18:20, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Don't ask me to replicate it though. I totally blundered my way into it. Bloody confusing that! Keresaspa (talk) 02:50, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a million. It was a nightmare.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 17:04, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Any relation to Ronald "Nikko" Jackson?

[edit]

Was Robin a relation of Ronald "Nikko" Jackson of Portadown who was a "freelancer" between the UVF and UDA? According to Judge Barron's report he stole the car used in the 1974 Monaghan bombing. He was a skilled bombmaker and car thief although not a member of either group.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 17:04, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Robin Jackson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:30, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Place of birth?

[edit]

I am quite sure Jackson was born in Donaghmore, County Down not Tyrone. This village is only a matter of yards from the scene of the Miami showband massacre. For what its worth I was sure Jackson was also buried in the same village. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dessie Porter (talk • contribs) 13:22, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Robin Jackson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 06:20, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mistake in the '1976' subheading of the 'Other Killings' section.

[edit]

In the first paragraph under the 1976 subheading of the 'Other Killings' section, there is a link to the wiki of the place called 'Kingsmill', however it directs to a Kingsmill in Virginia, USA. I assume this is a mistake, however I don't know enough about editing Wikipedia to rectify it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.233.215.15 (talk) 12:49, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mobile Shop Killing Allegation

[edit]

The paragraph below appears to be outdated and now factually incorrect so should be deleted. A living person is being sued for as responsible for these murders and indeed another living person named the persons allegedly responsible in a separate trial (all publicly available information). No reliable source appears to be alleging Robin Jackson is the person responsible for these murders. The statement of Weir is a primary source, biased and clearly unreliable in the context of a biography and in light of recent cases and other articles.

Generally, should the lengthy paragraphs in relation to attacks and killings that have their own articles be so lengthy so as to avoid duplication and potential mismatching?

"...reportedly perpetrated his last killings in March 1991, with the fatal shootings of three Catholics, Eileen Duffy, Catriona Rennie, and Brian Frizzell, at a mobile shop in Craigavon. Duffy and Rennie were teenage girls. Weir's affidavit contradicted this as it pointed out that although Jackson was aware that the killings were to take place, he had not been at the scene of the crime; a solicitor informed Weir he had been with Jackson at his home at the time the shootings occurred to provide him with an alibi. Investigative journalist Paul Larkin suggested that the shooting attack against the shop was organised by Jackson upon receiving complaints from UDR soldiers after they had been refused service and insulted by the mobile shop employees. Larkin identified one of the hitmen as Mark "Swinger" Fulton. Although the RUC initially arrested UVF members associated with Jackson, they then focused their attention on the men belonging to the Mid-Ulster Brigade's Portadown unit led by Billy Wright. Fulton was a prominent member of this unit and served as Wright's right-hand man." TheSquareMile (talk) 19:59, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I just came upon your posting. Thank you for the new information which of course demonstrates that Jackson didn't have a hand in the killings. I shall delete the outdated paragraph immediately. Cheers Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:31, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Jeanne Boleyn. I haven't figured out all the coding yet but wonder whether in the paragraph relating to Billy Wright handover, whether it could be updated to link to Michael McGoldrick's Wikipedia page? Clifford McKeown was convicted of his murder and there are plenty of news articles in relation to that (and court judgments). I'll figure out the referencing at the weekend. TheSquareMile (talk) 22:47, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rank

[edit]

The UVF has only one brigadier, its commander-in-chief (John Graham) who holds the rank of brigadier-general. Commanders of brigades, so-called "brigadiers", are colonels (or lieutenant-colonels). Brigades exist only outside Belfast, where battalion commanders are definitely lieutenant-colonels. I hope my change in the infobox is fair, although "(UVF rank)" could read "(UVF terminology)" if editors are sure the term "brigadier" is appropriate Billsmith60 (talk) 12:00, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, this would need to be sourced and you probably shouldn't be referring to a named living individual - I not sure the newspapers even name that person. TheSquareMile (talk) 22:44, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Bunter Graham has been named for years by numerous papers as the UVF CoS (since 1976) Billsmith60 (talk) 19:40, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
thanks for that clarification. Much appreciated Bill Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 22:27, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Robin_Jackson&oldid=1224044745"