Talk:Kevin Myers

Alleged Hate Speeches

Does anybody have a source for the alleged comments made on NewsTalk and the alleged lawsuit under Incitement to Hatred being brought in that case? There are sources for the first paragraph, but we have to verify any allegations made if true and delete untrue ones, as per Wikipedia:BLP. Autarch (talk) 12:22, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Removed that para just now. Per WP:BLP, and as its unsourced and speculative "a resident... is to make a complaint...". As and when s/he has done so, its been investigated and the oucome reported in the news or an annual report, it can be included, but until then, I don't think so. Bastun^{BaStun not BaTsun} 14:08, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello, I'm not sure how to use this website. Kevin Myers did make the comment in question. I have filed a complaint to the Gardai. Hope I am using the webpage correctly, if not, it's ok to delete my post. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saintpadraig (talk • contribs) 18:49, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi Saintpadraig. I've reverted your edit again. I'm absolutely assuming good faith here - although I've no doubt Myers did make the remarks you claim - including them would be a breach of a couple of policies - namely WP:BLP, WP:V and WP:COI. Assuming the Gardaí were to act on your complaint and that the outcome was reported, then someone else, other than you, could include it. If Newstalk has a podcast link to the segment in question, then you could include the first part of the deleted paragraph if you include that link as a source. Regards, Bastun^{BaStun not BaTsun} 21:21, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

"Homophobia"

Hi,

The citation given for the deleted paragraph does not support the claim that Myers is homophobic. It was a newspaper column by the subject of this article, which was about political correctness in the press and society. For it to support such a claim, he would actually have to say outright, "I am homophobic" - which he clearly did not. It is not enough for an wikipedia editor to read an article, and find that it is self-evidently biased in one way or another.

This is a WP:BLP, one cannot read a writer's articles, dislike the content and then write on wikipedia that that man is "homophobic" - itself a libellous and outrageous claim. As per WP:Sources, to state that he is homophobic here one must have multiple, reliable, non-partisan sources. Thank you Ktlynch (talk) 21:09, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

WP:BLP

Could contributors to the article please provide sources for their claims, as per WP:BLP.Autarch (talk) 20:12, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Kevin Myers and The Phoenix

Myers is referred to as Colonel Myarse or Kevin Myarse reguarly in the Phoenix. I find it odd that this was removed given the fact that on the Peter Carter-Ruck article it mentions the fact that he was referred to as "Carter-Fuck" or "Farter-Fuck" by Private Eye magazine.ĵ

Exiledone (talk) 15:43, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Juvenile and puerile humour, or repeating of same, is not appropriate here. Snappy (talk) 17:58, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Well put. Ceoil 17:48, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

You're not exactly answering my point given the fact that the Peter Carter Ruck article mentions he was referred to as "Carter-Fuck" of "Farter-Fuck", which I think would be considered more "Juvenile and puerile" than "Colonel Myarse".

Can we just mention the fact that he is a fairly regular target of satire. Exiledone (talk) 13:06, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Do you have a source for that? Obviously other than the Phoenix. Please be aware of WP:BLP. Snappy (talk) 14:48, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

No way are we going down the Farter-Fuck route. But given he is a professional controversialist, and earns money that way, I'd mention satire, but not repeat it. Ceoil 15:24, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Agreed, and just because other crap exists does not mean it is to be repeated elsewhere. Snappy (talk) 00:27, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Not only does other crap exist, but its a constant fight to keep it out. Explaining basic decency to idiots. Ceoil 00:51, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Dont refer to me as an idiot Ceoil. Also if you want to explain basic decency to idiots my advice is to explain it to the subject of the article.

Exiledone (talk) 12:00, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I have struck your personal opinion of the living subject of the article - please be aware WP:BLP applies to talk pages just as much as the article space and that the talkpages of living subjects in not a place for you to vocalize your dislike or opinions about the subject. Off2riorob (talk) 16:14, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Recent edits

This edit, though it removed a section called Style, removed a section which described some of his views. This edit, though made to remove mere mention of a column, removed mention of a column that Myers' then employer refused to publish, as well as removing some mention of his political views about the USA.Autarch (talk) 23:00, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

As a colummnist, Meyers likely has a view on every subject imaginable. How should we determine which of his views are notable, and which are not. The easiest way is to look at what others have written about his views. In the section I removed, there wasn't anything written by others. The bit about his employer refusing to publish a column needs a source, because there wasn't one at all. Kevin (talk) 02:18, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Here's a couple:

Bank heist is snooze to the 'Irish Times'

Row over Myers' Irish Times column continues to blaze - "An article in which he blamed the IRA for the bank robbery in Belfast - before similar allegations were made by Northern Ireland police chief Hugh Orde - was not published." Autarch (talk) 22:07, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Here's a couple more on a different topic - the "bastards" controversy:

Waters to sue Irish Times on Myers slur

Of Gonzos, Bastards And Other Controversial Matters

I'll see what else I can dig up over the next few weeks.Autarch (talk) 22:16, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Question regarding WP:BLP

Does WP:BLP apply to past edits - specifically edits that would be legally actionable? In other words, would WP:BLP mean that defamatory edits need to be purged from the history of an article?Autarch (talk) 00:40, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

"Bastards" controversy

It's extraordinary that this has been removed from this page, given its role in his infamy and ultimate departure from The Irish Times. Also, his very controversial views of Bloody Sunday, travellers, Irish and Irish nationalists have also been sources of the same infamy. This article seems to have whitewashed them all, leaving readers without a full appreciation of the sheer genius that is Sir Kevin Myers, the ultimate supertroll. 93.107.2.255 (talk) 10:31, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 June 2015

Hi,

I'm Mark Tighe from The Sunday Times. Kevin Myers would like where he lives deleted from this page. He has concerns about his personal safety and would prefer if the exact town he lives in was not on this page. The fact that he lives in Co Kildare should be specific enough without causing him his current concern.

Mark

mark.tighe@sunday-times.ie Toffeeman34 (talk) 13:05, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi Mark, thats removed now. Ceoil (talk) 13:50, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kevin Myers. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.rte.ie/ten/2001/1205/myersk.html

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

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:28, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Holocaust denial

I'm aware that "holocaust denier" can be a contentious label, so is this BBC article sufficient RS? The relevant part of the article text reads "In 2009, Mr Myers wrote a column for the Irish Independent newspaper denying the Holocaust happened." It doesn't use the exact words "holocaust denier" to describe him, so I figured I should query that before reverting MPS1992's revert of the holocaust denier category. The source is already linked in the article, currently #11 in the reflist. Marianna251TALK 14:50, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

I'm curious about the "labelled". It seems Myers used some deliberately provocative word games in the article where he denied six million died, and denied the Holocaust happened (he said it is not exactly six-million and this was just a rounded figure, and then took the meaning of holocaust from before Hitler's atrocities, rather than its current use to mean the Shoah). After this he basically went to accept that the Holocaust happened in the way the historical consensus has it. I think he was making a point about free speech and what he sees as liberal hypocrisy, as well as trying to cause offence as usual.

Then the Guardian quoted Myers' original article out of context and made it look like Myers is indeed a Holocaust denier. But they didn't label him a Holocaust denier, as he probably isn't, however much an anti-Semitic shit he is.

So I'm not sure if the use of the word "labelled" is OR. Or whether we should even call him a denier

This is the article where he "denies" while not sorta maybe not denying. Here --Mongreilf (talk) 15:00, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

I just got to this as well because of his Sunday Times article today. Why bring the Jewish heritage of Winkleman/Feltz into it? If he could be accused of headstrong hamfistedness in his 2009 article, this 2017 one makes me suspect the worst of him. Even Irving's been on tape saying that "millions" of Jews were killed by the Nazis, so his 2009 article saying the same doesn't necessarily mean anything. There's a Guardian article here that describes him as a denier. The current "He's been labelled a Holocaust denier" seems like a nice dodge. I suspect he is actually some form of denier, so have little sympathy for him. --BowlAndSpoon (talk) 15:04, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Well, if we have the Guardian and the BBC saying that he denied the holocaust, then I think it's not OR to say he's been labelled as a holocaust denier. There is a difference between being labelled as X and actually being X, though. Do we have sufficient RS at the moment to say flat-out that he is a holocaust denier? I'm of the opinion that he is, and he's clearly of the opinion that he is, but MPS1992's edit summary was correct that we need third party reliable sources in order to make that statement. Do we have enough? Marianna251TALK 15:13, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

I'm with you: I think he's a slippery, Irving-style denier. Do we have the sources for stating it? I don't think we do. I think as it's BLP, his being "labelled" is the way to do it. Well, can't say I have any sympathy for this blatantly antisemitic individual, so if you want to change the article to state flatly that he is a denier, I won't be reverting you! --BowlAndSpoon (talk) 15:19, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Well, it's early days in the media circus, so it looks like this is a wait-and-see. Marianna251TALK 15:26, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

I added Category:Holocaust denial and got reverted. I didn't add Category:Holocaust deniers as that category states it's specifically for individuals who have actively promoted denial; but I think the general denial category is relevant and arguably not a BLP violation, given the well-sourced quotes in the article. Robofish (talk) 22:52, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

As per the thoughtful analysis above by Mongreilf, it's far from clear that this individual has anything thoughtful or meaningful to say in support of holocaust denial. It seems to me that the deniers category and the denial category are much similar, except that the denial category implies that an individual included in it is somehow important to that cause. I don't see how Myers is important to any cause. MPS1992 (talk) 23:06, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Agreed. My feeling is that he would only be relevant to the holocaust denial category if we had sufficient RS to put him in the holocaust deniers category, since they're so heavily linked. He misrepresents death toll figures, objects to the term "holocaust" (because the original Greek refers to an animal sacrifice that is burnt and only some of the holocaust victims were burnt in ovens), and generally minimises the holocaust with straw man arguments - all of that makes me of the opinion that he is a holocaust denier, but it's also pretty pathetic, as holocaust denial goes, and the categories are for significant coverage/active promotion. As it stands he'll be a footnote in the history of holocaust denial, if that. I wouldn't be surprised if that changed in the future, but for right now I've come around to the opinion that holocaust denial/denier doesn't fit. Marianna251TALK 23:27, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Myers wrote a follow-up article in April, 2009 to answer criticism he received regarding the Holocaust article at issue here. Here is a link. To me it seems clear that he was merely taking issue with Holocaust denial laws in the EU on free speech grounds. In my view, the sine qua non of actual Holocaust denial is rejecting the historical consensus that the Nazis conducted a program for exterminating the Jews. Holocaust deniers believe that no such program existed and that Jews were not put in gas chambers. Myers doesn't seem to be making that argument at all. He calls himself a holocaust denier in the narrow legal sense because he doesn't accept that precisely six million Jews died. He also asserts that "no journalist in Ireland has written as much and as often about the Holocaust, the Final Solution, the Shoah, the Nazi Genocide" as he has. If that's true, it seems inappropriate to cite this one deliberately provocative article as representative of his views on the Holocaust for Wikipedia readers. If we want to put him in the same category as David Irving, we should first look at what else he has written about the Holocaust an how third parties have interpreted those writings. DrQuinnEskimoWoman (talk) 01:06, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

I'm still with Marianna on this. What he says is classic Irving.

• Irving: "He [Himmler] stage-managed the Holocaust, whatever that was"; Myers: "The Holocaust is therefore that which happened to the Jews of Europe, between 1939-45, whatever that may have been."
• Irving: "If all the shootings on the Eastern Front are documented – there's no doubt the Nazis killed millions of Jews on the Eastern Front"; Myers: "They were shot by the hundreds of thousands in the Lebensraum of the east … millions of Jews were murdered."
• Irving: 6 million is "a symbolic number"; Myers: "Its enduring appeal — the digit six, with the six zeros which follow it — depends upon a fairly basic human predilection for numerological magic. It is, very likely, a subconsciously appealing version of the diabolical, 666." That symbolic number, 666, geddit? Yeah, we get it Mr Myers.
• Neither like the word Holocaust. Irving: "I don't use that word [Holocaust]; Myers: "there certainly was no holocaust. For if the word is to have any literal validity…"
• Irving: "the probable figure was nearer to four million"; Myers: "One Israeli estimate is that four million died."

You'll notice Myers explicitly says in his first article that he thinks there were ovens at Auschwitz – but the deniers' typical claim is regarding the gas chambers. Nowhere, in either article, does Myers say he thinks there were gas chambers at Auschwitz. I think that is deliberate, and the mention of the ovens are thrown in to mask it.

Their positions are exceedingly close when they aren't exactly the same. --BowlAndSpoon (talk) 14:42, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

There's also Myers ludicrous claim that the programme of annihilation "was begun informally by Nazi armies in 1941, and only took organised form after the Wannsee conference in January 1942", classic Irving 'Hitler knew nothing about this' stuff because there was nothing informal and it was organised well before Wannsee. Lovingboth (talk) 15:54, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Just to mention, we seem to have strayed now into our own analyses of what Myers has said (and how it is strikingly similar to things Irving has said). However convincing this analysis is -- and what BowlAndSpoon has quoted is certainly convincing -- the article should be based on independent reliable sources, not on our own analysis. MPS1992 (talk) 17:51, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

• Per MPS199's comment above, we're getting into original research territory. The consensus at the moment appears to be that, despite any personal opinions of the man or interpretations of his writing, there aren't enough reliable third party sources to add Myers to the either the "holocaust denial" or "holocaust denier" categories. I suggest we close this discussion until and unless further sources are found. Marianna251TALK 18:33, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

The phrase "is a self-described holocaust denier" is mendacious as it implies that he is an admitted holocaust denier without actually saying so, which would clearly be false. The phrase should probably read as "has self-described as a holocaust denier".

Mentioning controversy in the lead

Given that the lead is meant to summarise the article, surely the controversy surrounding him must be mentioned there? One sentence is not introducing WP:undue weight. WP:LEAD: "Like in the body of the article itself, the emphasis given to material in the lead should roughly reflect its importance to the topic, according to reliable, published sources". Gaia Octavia Agrippa ^Talk 18:57, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Absolutely. Ceoil reverted my re-insertion of your addition and commented on my talk page: "You basically reinstated an accusation of anti-semitism. I hope you realise what that entails. Myers has been active on the talk page before, so." Well, yes, I do realise what I'd done - restored a referenced fact, that Myers has been accused of anti-semitism. It's there in black and white in the reference and completely satisfies BLP. We're also most certainly allowed to say he lives in Kildare. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 19:11, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Up to you man, and what you can live with. I dont really give a damn from here and have fun. Ceoil (talk) 19:13, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

I think it would be worth briefly mentioning the other controversies, since they're also a significant chunk of the article. The word "fired" should also be changed, though, since that might not be strictly true and the source we have just says he won't be writing for them again. That could just mean they won't buy articles from him again; we don't know. Here's my suggestion:

Kevin Myers (born 30 March 1947) is a British-Irish journalist and writer. He has contributed to the The Irish Times column "An Irishman's Diary", the Irish Independent, and formerly the Irish edition of The Sunday Times. Myers is noted for his controversial views on a number of topics, including single mothers, aid for Africa and the holocaust. The Sunday Times announced that Myers would no longer be writing for them following an article he wrote on the BBC gender pay gap, for which he was accused of antisemitism and sexism.

Thoughts? Marianna251TALK 20:58, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Other than substituting "known" for "noted", it's suitable. Philip Cross (talk) 21:06, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Done, thanks for the feedback. Marianna251TALK 21:11, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Well worded. I'll substitute 'misogyny' for 'sexism', as that's what most of the sources are saying; and link directly to the ST Irish edition rather than double-linking the article. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 21:22, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Good point; I'll change the "Antisemitism and sexism" header to "Antisemitism and misogyny". Marianna251TALK 21:26, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 July 2017

Hi - although I understand completely why no-one would want to claim him as a compatriot given recent events, the edit that completely removes his Irish ancestry, and the fact that he self-identifies as Irish, is deeply POV. He describes himself as an "English-born Irish journalist" (see http://kevinmyers.ie/kevin-myers-about/) and in the absence of better sourcing I suggest that this the correct intro to this entry. I would suggest therefore a change to "English-born Irish journalist" as that is what the sources support. There is no evidence supporting the contention that he is, or self-identifies, as English. He has worked in Ireland his whole adult life and was born to Irish parents, he identifies as Irish, so he should be identified by us as such or, at least, reference to that identification made MartinWye (talk) 11:55, 31 July 2017 (UTC) MartinWye (talk) 11:55, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

It also introduces unsourced content. I'll revert. (Just to note, new talk-page sections should be added at the bottom, not the top of the page, MartinWye.) Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 11:57, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

I will add in the source to the other information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donn300 (talk • contribs) 16:28, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

 Done

Donn300, please see discussion above. Just because somebody is born abroad doesn't remove their Irishness. You have also introduced unsourced content, which is why it was reverted. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 14:35, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi MartinWye/Bastun, I agree in general that "just because somebody is born abroad doesn't remove their Irishness", and have made that point myself about others e.g. the great philosopher G.E.M. Anscombe was born in Limerick but nobody says she was Irish, she was a British person who happened to have been born in Ireland, her father was stationed there, but she was brought up in Britain. Now this is not the same with Myers. He was not just born in England (which is not so important), but he LIVED in England UNTIL he was already an ADULT for a couple of years (& could've served in the army for many years by then). The reason he has an English accent is because he grew up in England - his birth, upbringing & turning into an adult all took place in England. He went to an English Public School, and so had a very particularly English type of upbringing. You said "the edit that completely removes his Irish ancestry", but the change specifically says that his father was Irish (a GP working there) so I don't think it was correct to say that. He is English of Irish heritage. To illustrate this further, think about the English broadcaster Terry Christian, he was brought up in England by Irish parents (often refers to his Irish dad), has a distinct accent from where he grew up in England, but nobody has thought about suggesting that he is anything other than English, nor would they if he had moved to Ireland when he was about 20 years old. Why treat Myers differently to Terry Christian (& countless other British people of Irish heritage)? Myers may self-identify as Irish, but so did Alfred Willmore (he even changed his name to Micheál Mac Liammóir), and Patrick O'Brian also claimed to be Irish, but that did not make them factually Irish. In fact could one not say (to be kind) that Myers saying he is Irish is POV (his POV). I will add in the source to the other information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donn300 (talk • contribs) 16:28, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Myers is of Irish descent and has spent his entire adult life in Ireland. Do we know which passport he carries? At the moment the aticle's 'English' claim just looks like yer usual Irish-nationalist racism. Khamba Tendal (talk) 19:00, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Myers was a 19 or 20 year old English man when he came to Ireland. Yes he is of Irish descent, but there are hundreds of thousands of English people of Irish descent. What about the example of Terry Christian, if he moved to Ireland as an adult would you try to say he was Irish? And if someone makes a claim to be something, that does not make it so. Alfred Willmore claimed to be Irish (he even changed his name to Micheál Mac Liammóir), and Patrick O'Brian also claimed to be Irish, but that did not make it so.

Because he self-identifies as Irish, lives in Ireland, worked (until yesterday) in Ireland, and you don't know what passport he carries. Stop edit-warring against consensus, your PoV is showing. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 19:49, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Jebus, even the source you latterly provided includes him saying he's Irish! Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 19:58, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Donn asks a good question, given that Myers is not only born and raised in England, but has made a career out of denigrating Irish nationality itself. Is he a West Brit, or simply a fully fleged English Tory? It is a valid question to ask and sociologically there is a big difference between a member of the nation criticising his own country out of love or compassion and a foreigner just attacking it to denigrate or feel superior. Especially given Myers' penchant for wishing to "commemorate" British Empire soldiers from WWI, while attacking the Easter Rising of 1916 as "absolutely nothing to celebrate". Claíomh Solais (talk) 21:17, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Certainly you could submit your views on this topic to an academic journal. If published, it could be considered as something to include in this Wikipedia article. MPS1992 (talk) 22:30, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

He'd be far from alone in doubting the legitimacy of the Rising - mainstream Irish politicians have done the same. And thousands of Irish volunteers died in the trenches because they assumed it would bring Home Rule. But, obviously, you know all this. Our PoV can't come into it. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 08:56, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

I don't think that you carefully read my comments above from yesterday.

"self-identifies as Irish" - that does not make it so (Alfred Willmore claimed to be Irish (he even changed his name to Micheál Mac Liammóir), and Patrick O'Brian also claimed to be Irish, but that did not make it so in either case. There are countless other example around the world.

"lives in Ireland" - I think that Joe Duffy said something similar about the London bridge attacker Rachid Redouane when he said one attacker 'is Irish' / 'came from Ireland' because Redouane used to live in Rathmines in Dublin. Sorry to have to make the point with that example, but it really is surprising that you would write "lives in Ireland" as a reason!

"worked (until yesterday) in Ireland" - similar strength of argument as the 'lives' one above. Rachid Redouane also worked in Ireland (pastry chef apparently). A lot of people around the world have English colleagues, that does not turn those English colleagues into French/Irish/Italian... people.

I am not biased against him (I think Ireland a fairly tolerant place that can have him in the country criticizing it without incident and indeed liked by many), but it is factually true that he was an adult of 19 or 20 years of age when he arrived in Ireland to live. He came from England where he was born and raised (just like Terry Christian) and in anyone's language he is English. He can be described as 'English of Irish heritage' (like huge numbers of others). Before my edit there was no mention of the fact that he was an English adult when he arrived in Ireland.

Yes, of course, why would I want to censor what he says. But the fact that someone makes a claim to be something does not make it so. Again: Alfred Willmore claimed to be Irish (he even changed his name to Micheál Mac Liammóir), and Patrick O'Brian also claimed to be Irish, but that did not make it so. I used that reference because it had the detail of him moving to Ireland as an adult after having been born and raised to the age of 19 or 20 in England, and it had the details of his particularly English growing-up experience by attending an English public school. It also had other relevant information (father's death, but staying in school with help of LEA) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donn300 (talk • contribs)

Donn300 could you please do us the courtesy of reading WP:TALK, posting in chronological order, and signing your posts, please? This stuff isn't hard and makes life easier for everyone.

Once again - see WP:V and WP:CONSENSUS. You are of course entitled to your own opinions on Irish citizenship and who qualifies for it, but you're not entitled to your own facts. If you can prove Myers is a UK citizen and/or doesn't hold Irish citizenship, grand. In the absence of that, self-identification as Irish and being born to an Irish father means he's Irish. Much as some of us would wish it otherwise. The information on his father and his father's death is still in the article and isn't appropriate for the lead. Stop edit warring or you'll end up blocked. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 13:15, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Apologies for the misleading locations of my comments but I was trying to put the answers just underneath others' relevant comments. I like and use that Daniel Moynihan line myself ("entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts"). I do not wish to be in an edit war, I was adding agreed known facts: Myers grew into an adult (from birth) in England, and while he may or may not have become a naturalised Irish citizen afterwards, the article made no mention that he was already an English adult when he arrived in Ireland. You have now put in the lead that Myers "is an English-born Irish journalist and writer", but that implies that he probably came to Ireland as a child or baby. Did you see my earlier reference to the great philosopher G.E.M. Anscombe who was born in Limerick but nobody says she was Irish, she was a British person who happened to have been born in Ireland, her father was stationed there, but she was brought up in Britain and that is mainly why people regard her as British. Maybe the opening line should acknowledge Myers first ~20 years and not mislead people, it could say something like Myers "is an English-born-and-raised Irish journalist.." (though if someone read about a "Scottish-born-and-raised journalist" they would think he was Scottish. So maybe instead it should say that he became a naturalised Irish citizen in adulthood (did he?), so maybe Myers "is an English-born-and-raised Irish-naturalised journalist..". Or if we don't know that he is Irish-naturalised for sure then we could say that he self-identifies as Irish though/and is English-born-and-raised. It recently said something like that: Myers "is an English journalist and writer who moved to Ireland at the age of 19 to attend University College Dublin. His father was an Irish GP living and working in Leicester and Myers later self-identified as Irish (also)". I don't think that so bad, it is accurate and not biased, and unlike the current version it does not mislead people into thinking he was taken to Ireland when he was young, implying that England was a trivial detail in his make-up, whereas he was made into a fully grown adult there. Donn300 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donn300 (talk • contribs) 14:18, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Overplaying the Anti-Semitic card, underplaying West Brit Anglomania

Kevin Myers is primarily known in Ireland as a West Brit "contrarian" journalist, who is one of a number of almost exclusively Dublin/Pale-based public figures who have built up a cottage industry of denigrating traditional Irish (read: Gaelic) culture, language and Irish republican politics. I am surprised that there is absolutely no mention of this at all in the article (probably because his Anglomania in this area is seen as highly mature among Dublin 4 types and the reason for his employment at a number of newspapers over the years).

Compared to his anti-Irishness, his anti-Jewishness pales in comparison (he has literally gone as far as to state that the surviving Irish population are "genetically" defective). And in fact he has sometimes taken some positions which are generally unpopular in Ireland, relating to supporting Israeli military actions (he does this mostly to annoy republicans who support Palestine). I am not one to look a gift horse in the mouth and if the West Brit crowd are willing to throw one of their Gael-bashing propagandists under the horse for anti-semitism, then that serves a purpose, but the article does seem somewhat slanted to certain ideas, while completely excluding other (arguably more notable) ones. Claíomh Solais (talk) 20:22, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

The article currently reflects the third party reliable sources that have been provided. Personally, I think his sexism could do with more attention, since that is just as blatant, if not more so, than his antisemitism - but the sources have primarily focussed on his antisemitism so that's what the article has to reflect. Do you have any reliable sources talking about him being anti-Irish? Marianna251TALK 20:42, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

I've linked in some examples into the above text. It is pretty blatant and a running theme in his works. Claíomh Solais (talk) 22:02, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Those are all primary sources, written by Myers himself, not reliable third party sources. Adding something about "West Brit Anglomania" to the article based on these would be WP:OR. Marianna251TALK 22:12, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Myers' other opinions

Hello. I'm not sure if these warrant mentioning in the article, but it may be relevant that Myers has written several articles for the highly controversial Breitbart website: [1]

Myers also supported the Second Gulf War, and criticized Irish people who opposed that war: "So no rejoicing from them that freedom has come to the people of Iraq, courtesy of the greatest democracies in the world". (Kevin Myers, "An Irishman's Diary", The Irish Times, April 11, 2003, [2] ).

And in an interview with "Newstalk", Myers said about Donald Trump "He's deplorable, but most politicians are. I don't know if I'd have been able to stomach a Clinton presidency, so maybe Trump is a deplorable character that [sic] be a better President.' [3]. 176.61.15.11 (talk) 22:31, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Gotta appreciate the Karma here! One of the "causes" he championed in the Irish Times was the excoriation of Francis Stuart for his anti-semitism (though personally I suspect it was Stuart's Irish Republican background was the real reason). That his career as a mainstream columnist ended amid allegations of holocaust denial fills one with schadenfreude...:) Sarah777 (talk) 20:32, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 May 2022

I am suggesting that as Kevin is subject to abuse that instead of English born. . Kevin is an Irish journalist who was born in the UK. 2A02:8084:D03:8580:4CFC:F10F:2FBA:D684 (talk) 17:23, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:18, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

"Secret meeting arranged by journalist Kevin Myers" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Secret meeting arranged by journalist Kevin Myers and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 6#Secret meeting arranged by journalist Kevin Myers until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 19:44, 6 October 2022 (UTC)