Talk:Laudabiliter

Date of invasion

The invasion of Ireland began, at first, in 1166 AD — according to a previous version of this article. Did History change ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.143.68.244 (talk) 02:56, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

English King Henry II

Born in France, 3/4s Norman, lived in France, married a Frenchwoman, spoke French not English, married in France to a Frenchwoman, died in France, buried in France. How did he get to be English exactly?

He invaded England and made himself King, he was not English.GordyB 10:37, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Not an Anglo-Norman either, from the Anglo-Norman article:-

The Anglo-Normans were the descendants of the Normans who ruled England following the conquest by William of Normandy in 1066. They spoke the Anglo-Norman language. Following the Battle of Hastings, the invading Normans and their descendants formed a distinct population in England.

Henry II's mother was Anglo-Norman but his father was not and his mother was his only connection with England. He belonged to a different dynasty from William the Conquerer.GordyB 13:00, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Henri II would have been horrified to be described as English. The English were just a part of his empire. "Laudabiliter" was issued as we hadn't ever paid our dues to Rome for the use of the Christian message - rather like using a franchise today.86.42.219.183 (talk) 01:01, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Good work fellow. Henry II was as English as Queen Victoria was Irish. Some people are very indoctrinated on the subject.GordyB (talk) 08:59, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Citation for quote

the quote from john is perfect for a paper im doing but you guys havent put in Real citations, way to make this page useless —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.104.141.20 (talk) 00:56, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Write your own paper, lazy student.GordyB (talk) 00:59, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

When you've tracked down the citations, come back and edit them in: that's how it works: get some help, give some help! --Wetman (talk) 01:05, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

lazy? i am writing my own paper, i use wikipedia to get a clear understanding of my subject matter and then use real sources to back wikipedia (which is an unacceptable source in university). however the quote on this page is wonderful, but useless since it isnt sourced. who ever put the quote up should be sourcing it at the same time as they add it in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.104.141.15 (talk) 20:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

You who have contributed nothing to this page, feel the need to crticise the efforts of those who did?GordyB (talk) 21:00, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Which quote, 131.104.141.15/20? If you mean either one of the two "big" quotes, the ref is here. A reference is as an end-note rather that inline. It lacks the publisher and place, which you will need for an academic essay. A full citation is:

• Hull, E., 1931, A History of Ireland, Volume One, GC Harrap & Co.:London

As a tip, an easy way to find the source of an an uncited quote is to Google a chunk of it (e.g. like this).

Now, if you are done demonstrating how lazy everyone else is, and if we've helped you enough with your essay, you might be so good as to do the work of putting the citation in line and adding the publisher and following the conventions in Wikipedia:Citing sources. As the person, who wrote much of the article as it stands (see diff), I feel I've done enough, but that you haven't. --sony-youth^pléigh 21:45, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Dusty Archives

"No further official reference to the Bull of 1555 nor to Laudabiliter was ever made again — neither by the Papacy nor by the Governments of England, Ireland nor Spain. It must be presumed that the low-level Papal diplomatic recognition of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland in 1914 and the establishment of full diplomatic relations between the Holy See and the Irish Free State in 1922 both entailed the implicit final consignment of Laudabiliter to the dusty archives."

"Dusty archives" is an out of date cliche. Most archives are not dusty and mouldy and the documents held by archives are far from dead in this part of the world. John Kelcher, Sound Archivist, New Zealand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.144.32.165 (talk) 02:40, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Article expansion

I'll be expanding each section some more over the coming days. --Domer48 (talk) 22:28, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Reverting a copy edit

Domer48, what are you doing reverting a copy edit? Do you think it is productive to revert additions of wiki-links, grammar fixes, and MOS italics? --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid (coṁrá) 22:55, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

OR at the end

The last sentence "It must be presumed that the low-level Papal diplomatic recognition of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland in 1914 and the establishment of full diplomatic relations between the Holy See and the Irish Free State in 1922 both entailed the implicit final consignment of Laudabiliter to the archives." is very bad. It starts with an unsourced presumption and ends up with a bit of poetry which has no clear meaning. "Implicit" seems like OR, and what does "final consignment to the archives mean"? -- Evertype·✆ 07:12, 29 July 2009 (UTC)