User talk:Edl-irishboy

Hi Edl-irishboy - Could you please update the graph on the above page, the recoveries were announced this evening as 12,222 RTE News I don't know how to update the graphs myself :( Joseywales1961 (talk) 20:08, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Edl-irishboy, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your additions to Cruinniú na nÓg have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

• You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
• Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
• Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
• If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
• Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. See also Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 22:17, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Edl-irishboy

Thank you for creating Allie Sherlock.

User:Bogger, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Notability established, Suitably referenced

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Bogger}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Bogger (talk) 11:28, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Great work updating the information on the new government. Are we sure that the Department of Defence is being transferred to the Department of Foreign Affairs? If you look back on Minister for Defence, you'll notice a number of times that the minister was held with that of another department. In any case, even if the plan is to actually transfer the functions of Defence to Foreign Affairs, until there is an order transferring functions, there are formally separate departments. So it's probably better for now to list Coveney as separately being Minister for Foreign Affairs and Minister for Defence.

Similarly, are we sure that Department of Social Protection, Community and Rural Development and the Islands is the successor of Department of Rural and Community Development, and not Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection? —Iveagh Gardens (talk) 08:12, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for going about these, but the process of government departments changing is a complicated process. We tend to use the term abolish only in the case of Supplies, Posts and Telegraphs, and the original Transport, as they were formally abolished by statute (see Ministers and Secretaries Acts). Where functions are transferred, so that it is only an empty shell, we tend to say that it lapsed. See, for example, Minister for Labour (Ireland). But we would do that only after the responsibilities of the department have been transferred by statutory instruments. That can take a few months, in 2017, it wasn't till some time in September that the last of changes were made, after government formation in mid-June, see Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection. So as of yet, the Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment, and it is not clear which will be the successor departments to which. —Iveagh Gardens (talk) 20:21, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Minister for Higher Education, Innovation and Research, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. CommanderWaterford (talk) 10:39, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is likely that the Minister for Rural and Community Development will be renamed as the Minister for Higher Education, Innovation and Research, so our convention is to rename the page when that is confirmed, rather than creating a new page. While the changes in departments may seem incoherent, it uses the continuity of departments under the Ministers and Secretaries Acts. —Iveagh Gardens (talk) 20:53, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from COVID-19 pandemic in Mexico into Timeline of the COVID-19 pandemic in Mexico. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Diannaa (talk) 18:45, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Edl-irishboy, thanks for all your edits and updates to the page for COVID-19 in Ireland !

I think I've found an error going back to the second day (22 April) after the first recovery cases were announced (21 April). The active cases on 21 April is correct at 6,077, which I checked by subtraction from the numbers on gov.ie. 16,040 total - 730 deaths - (8,377 + 856) recoveries = 6,077 active cases.

Then on the following day 22 April, there were 631 new cases, no new recoveries, so I'd think it should have been 6,077 + 631 = 6,708 but I see 6,669 active in the timeline graph.

And I noticed for 20 April, the death (687) and active cases (14,940) don't add up to the total (15,652), but to 15,627. The active cases should be 15,652 - 687 = 14,965.

Does this mean all the numbers on the timeline graph have to be double-checked going back to 29 February ? Only gov.ie shows new cases and then denotified cases in their updates.

The Bing COVID-19 tracker shows active cases from Wikipedia data, and it's been incorrect for the last 2 days, currently showing 1,064 active cases in Ireland for 12 August, when it should be 1,067.

On 11 August, it was 35 new cases, 2 denotified, so actually 33 new cases, so here it should have been 996 + 33 = 1,029 but you put in 1,028 which I fixed later to 1,029.

Yesterday 12 August, it was 40 new cases, 2 denotified, so actually 38 new cases, so here it should have been 1,029 + 38 = 1,067 but you put in 1,064 active cases, which I fixed later to 1,067.

Thanks, Aku-PDF-Finder (talk) 00:51, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply on my talk page! I'll reply there.

Aku-PDF-Finder (talk) 23:59, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Edl-irishboy,

Thank you for creating Fergal Bowers.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

The article currently relies on primary sources. Try citing independent secondary reliable sources such as this article on Fergal Bowers.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Zindor}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Zindor (talk) 12:56, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in COVID-19 pandemic in the Republic of Ireland, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. — Smjg (talk) 12:58, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not use styles that are nonstandard, unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in COVID-19 pandemic in the Republic of Ireland. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Thank you.

Additionally, I saw an edit in which you removed a maintenance template with the summary "It is pretty clear what "known mode of transmission" means". It was not asking for clarification of "known mode of transmission". It was asking for clarification of "% known mode of transmission". What are these percentages of exactly? This is not clear at all. Please don't remove maintenance templates just because you don't understand the issue being raised. — Smjg (talk) 18:15, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This % known mode of transmission graph has been on this article for many months now. This graph shows the percentages of all the transmission classifications of community transmission, close contact with confirmed case and travel abroad - since the pandemic began in Ireland. This exact graph is also shown on the RTÉ website, Ireland's national television and radio broadcaster - at this website. This graph on that website indeed looks the exact same, but it was not copied into the Wikipedia article. The statistical data is from the Department of Health of Ireland and the Health Protection Surveillance Centre. On that website I stated, the title also mentions "% known mode of transmission". All the statistical data is from 'statements' made by the National Public Health Emergency Team each evening on Gov.ie. Such as this evening's statement is → [1]. In statements, it states the exact details and percentages of modes of transmission. And so, from all statements they publish since April 2020, the data of transmission of COVID-19 is pasted into the graph. I cannot clarify more than this. I believe that the maintenance template should be removed. Thanks. Edl-irishboy (talk) 22:20, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Saying "percentages of modes of transmission" doesn't explain anything. What does "32% of the modes of transmission" mean? That neither of us seems to know this proves that it doesn't state "the exact details". It looks to me to be a breakdown of confirmed cases by how they caught the virus, but is it based on cumulative totals, people actually infected as of each date, or cases confirmed on each date?

In any case, that you don't have the necessary information to be able to clarify it isn't a justification for removing the {{clarifyme}}. The whole point of the template is to flag something up in the hope that somebody can provide the clarification. If there's no hope of finding this info then the best course of action would be to remove the graph from the article. There's no point having it if nobody understands what it means. — Smjg (talk) 23:56, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The point of this graph is to show how COVID-19 is spreading in Ireland. On each statement published by NPHET, it shows the classification percentages of transmission of COVID-19. I, like other fellow editors of the page, constructed and added this graph to the article because these statistics and information published by trusted sources shows interesting data that I believe will help people browsing through the page understand how COVID-19 is spreading in Ireland. I'm not the person who made this entire data up, but I did use the data to construct a graph. The 32% you mentioned is through "community transmission". On NPHET's statement, it states that “When a person tests positive for COVID-19 but hasn't been abroad or had a known contact with another confirmed case in Ireland, that's known as community transmission.” I fully understand that this graph doesn't seem helpful or show any clarity, and I, the constructor of this graph, don't know the “exact details” or what the graph is based on, whether it is cumulative totals, people actually infected as of each date or cases confirmed on each date. However, I do not believe that this graph should be removed from this article due to the fact that it still shows “detailed” statistics of how COVID-19 is spreading in Ireland. I hope this issue can be solved soon. Edl-irishboy (talk) 01:50, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Edl-irishboy. I noticed you pinged me about alterations to the Ireland row in Template:COVID-19 cases in Europe. The changes I've been making have been via a script as a controlled test for a BRFA. Could you please explain the exact issue at length so I can fix the script? Sorry for the error. WikiMacaroons^Cinnamon? 18:04, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on crime in the Republic of Ireland has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 22:40, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Edl-irishboy. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Minister for Higher Education".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 16:35, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for diligently fixing the Irish Covid rates on Template:COVID-19 cases in Europe, and for generally putting up with my incompetence! WikiMacaroonsCinnamon? 15:48, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, @WikiMacaroons. Edl-irishboy (talk) 17:01, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for incorporating my userbox into your user-page! Interops (talk) 04:45, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I wanted to 'own up' to reversing your edits Arlene Foster earlier. You were right that Foster had resigned, but the reason that I reversed your edits was because you didn't cite a reliable source and, after a quick search, I couldn't find a news article that supported your claim. Sorry about this! I hope that all is okay now - the article is certainly correct! Thanks, FollowTheTortoise (talk) 12:44, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Irishboy,

I'm a big fan of your work and have been following your updates for well over the past years.

Would you mind telling me where you get the updated vaccination figures? I like being in the know on a day to day basis and my favourite part of each day was knowing exactly how many vaccines were delivered. Up until May 14th that is. MrBoopsy (talk) 16:20, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @MrBoopsy: The HSE COVID-19 dashboard shows daily vaccination figures, but is now currently left on pause due to the HSE cyberattack. Today (1 July), the HSE finally published the complete up-to-date vaccination figures - and the figures can be seen on this RTÉ News source. Edl-irishboy (talk) 16:29, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I'd give you an award if only I knew how. MrBoopsy (talk) 16:56, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Go to Wikipedia:Barnstars#Barnstars - Feel free to give me an award lol. Edl-irishboy (talk) 18:01, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey bro, you seem to be the man in the know about most things COVID related. Would you happen to know when the single shot vaccinations administered in pharmacies will be counted towards total vaccination numbers? Not looking for specific date, but your educated guess. MrBoopsy (talk) 14:20, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't a clue. I'm assuming that they already are counting towards total vaccine numbers?...... Edl-irishboy (talk) 14:44, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I noticed that you brought up the idea of adding a new parameter to this template so that it can support the inclusion of vaccination statistics. Would it be possible to have separate parameters for different kinds of doses? The current parameter allows unbulleted lists, but it also allows the possibility of having more than one way of displaying those numbers. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 04:40, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that would be awesome! Edl-irishboy (talk) 11:42, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think that such parameters could act in a similar way to the parameters for daily figures. Only numbers and references could be needed for each parameter. What do you think? LSGH (talk) (contributions) 16:53, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that would be great. Edl-irishboy (talk) 18:12, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can you slow down with the wholesale removal of Dexerto links? Especially since the discussion you're linking to only has two participants? It may be unreliable for notability standards, but you're removing a lot of stuff from established journalists who just happen to host their content on Dexerto, along with interviews and other things that they are likely WP:CONTEXTMATTERS reliable for. It's just creating a ton of work and I'm not sure that the two-person discussion justifies a complete depreciation, which is essentially what you're doing. Thanks! Alyo (chat·edits) 20:57, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. How about another column in format about vaccination rate like here. Best regards Terraflorin (talk) 07:05, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that would be a great idea to add a vaccination column. Edl-irishboy (talk) 13:56, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

		COVID-19 Barnstar
		Awarded for efforts in expanding and verifying articles related to COVID-19. Awarded by Cdjp1 (talk) 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, @Cdjp1. Edl-irishboy (talk) 19:42, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I know you have an interest in the ongoing 2022 monkeypox outbreak, so I wanted to invite you to the new monkeypox outbreak task force, which I started from the WikiProject of current events. The task force’s goal is to improve any and all articles relating to the new outbreak. I hope you consider joining! Elijahandskip (talk) 07:37, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mind sharing your reason for removing the PROD ? - FlightTime (open channel) 22:05, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Making a statement that "X was murdered by Y" could potentially affect a legal trial brought against Y. Even if there's a video on YouTube, or 400 witnesses. Any revision including that statement may be deleted by admins. Other than that, excellent work in advancing my work on the article. Bogger (talk) 07:34, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. There's something wrong here. That image isn't a screenshot of a webpage used "for the identification and critical commentary relating to the website in question". The article in which the image is used doesn't even mention the webpage that image was taken from. The same applies to this image. If these are simply errors, then please consider correcting them. Otherwise, per WP:IMAGEPOL, we cannot just grab images from elsewhere on the internet (including copyrighted journalistic sources) and "stretch" a fair use rationale to justify its use on the project. Guliolopez (talk) 21:21, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Atlantic Technological University Logo.png. However, there is a concern that the use of the image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. Details of this problem, and which specific criteria that the image may not meet, can be obtained by going to the image description page. If you feel that this image does meet those criteria, please place a note on the image description or talk page explaining why. Do not remove the {{di-fails NFCC}} tag itself.

An administrator will review this file within a few days, and having considered the opinions placed on the image page, may delete it in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion or remove the tag entirely. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 11:27, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Edl-irishboy. Thank you for your work on 2024 Irish budget. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Hey there! Hope you're having a great day. Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia with your article. I'm happy to inform you that your article has adhered to Wikipedia's policies, so I've marked it as reviewed. Have a fantastic day for you and your family!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 21:41, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:The Late Late Show 2023.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:25, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Edl-irishboy, I've rewritten your entry for 19 January for the second time since it may not be neutral, and also contains what could be regarded as original research because the BBC source you added predates the story by several days. As the entry is about the launch of the legal case then sources need to be about that specific event. Any history or discussion about the piece of legislation should be added to an article about the Act. I'll do some background reading into the subject and perhaps create an article, as it could do with being written. This is Paul (talk) 23:01, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @This is Paul, you must be mistaken as I didn’t add that entry into the page for 19 January. Another user did…see this link from 19 January: Special:Diff/1197190298..but no worries, mistakes can happen..thanks. Edl-irishboy (talk) 21:35, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I see someone else added the original post, but it looks like you accidentally re-added it (check out this edit). I should have checked a bit further back in the edit history to see who added the original material, so apologies for that. This is Paul (talk) 22:41, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh that’s strange.. I don’t remember adding that 🤣 it must have been a formatting issue when I was fixing the refs! Sorry about that. Edl-irishboy (talk) 23:41, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, This is Paul (talk) 21:44, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work! Ceoil (talk) 14:49, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Edl-irishboy (talk) 22:22, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Edl-irishboy. I've come across this intriguing paper^[1] showing that the proportion of girls and boys born in Ireland changed in an appreciable way 9 months following the start of the pandemic: 97.8 boys were born for every 100 girls born alive (Normally ~105 boys are born for every 100 girls). Could this appreciable change be added to the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic? Ear-phone (talk) 08:47, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ear-phone (talk) 08:47, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Ear-phone, Definitely is an interesting paper. Great find! It could be added to the Social impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Republic of Ireland page, but I'm not sure which section, maybe the Other section. Could you come up with the wording to this find if it were to be added to the page? Hope all is well, thanks. Edl-irishboy (talk) 17:51, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Edl-irishboy Thank you. I'm finding the wording a little challenging. How about, "In December 2020, nine months after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, the birth ratio in Ireland experienced a notable shift. Normally, around 105 boys are born for every 100 girls, but during this period, the ratio fell to 97.8 boys for every 100 girls born alive."? If ok please go ahead as I'm only on mobile phone for the next while. Ear-phone (talk) 20:37, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah it is a bit challenging.. covid didn’t start nine months before December 2020 though so maybe we can leave that line out. I can work on the wording over next few days, just a bit busy at the moment :) Edl-irishboy (talk) 10:35, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thank you @Edl-irishboy. Ear-phone (talk) 10:46, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ear-phone, how about “In December 2020, ten months after the pandemic arrived in Ireland, the country's birth ratio experienced a shift, with the number of boys born falling from around 105 per 100 girls to just 97.8 boys per 100 girls born alive.” Edl-irishboy (talk) 14:03, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Edl-irishboy. Thank you. I reckon the official declaration by the WHO in March 2020 of the COVID-19 pandemic is what triggered the lockdowns and other major mitigation measures in Ireland (and elsewhere), which had a material bearing on the human sex ratio. So December 2020 would be 9 months after this official declaration, tying in with the length of human pregnancy. Cancellation of St Patrick's day, etc. all happened in March 2020. That's my understanding atleast. What do you reckon? Ear-phone (talk) 18:46, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Edl-irishboy

Hi. I've added as, "In December 2020, nine months after the pandemic was declared by WHO, the country's birth ratio experienced a shift, with the number of boys born falling from around 105 per 100 girls to just 97.8 boys per 100 girls born alive." Ear-phone (talk) 13:50, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Ear-phone, thank you very much for adding that to the page. I’ve been busy so didn’t get the chance to add it! But yes it’s well worded so great work. Hope all is well. Edl-irishboy (talk) 15:08, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]