Talk:Northern Ireland

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article Northern Ireland was one of the Geography and places good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
News This article has been mentioned by a media organisation:

Internet TLD[edit]

The info box lists .ie as one of the Northern Ireland TLDs, but I think this is incorrect. There's a footnote stating .ie (ISO 3166-1 code IE) is assigned to Ireland which Northern Ireland is a part of - it's actually assigned to the Republic of Ireland. I suggest either removing .ie from the list, or noting that it's sometimes used by users in Northern Ireland (but that it's not an official Northern Ireland TLD). I would make this change myself but the page is protected.

2001:470:28:103:C40:FDCB:70B6:A716 (talk) 04:06, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

There's a discussion about this at Talk:Northern_Ireland/Archive_15#Should_.ie_get_listed_in_domain_field_on_Northern_Ireland.3F. Also see .ie. It was assigned before domains got political and now it has got stuck in a bit with the issue of identity. Dmcq (talk) 05:56, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
The footnote is a bit misleading. .ie is as assigned to the IEDR, which was previously a part of University College Dublin. Since 2002, it is administered (for better or for worse) on an all-island basis.
Northern Ireland itself doesn't have a ccTLD. --Tóraí (talk) 10:22, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
How would folks feel about a re-write as follows: ".uk is administered by Nominet UK for entities connected to the United Kingdom; .ie is administered by the IEDR for entities connected with the island of Ireland; and .eu is administered by EURid for entities connected with the European Economic Area." --Tóraí (talk) 10:37, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
Fine by me. Dmcq (talk) 11:25, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
I'm fine with that. 2001:470:28:103:C40:FDCB:70B6:A716 (talk) 01:49, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
Northern Ireland doesn't have any TLDs. .uk, .ie and .eu shouldn't be included on any of the UK's country's articles. It's like claiming .ie is the TLD of Dublin, as it doesn't have one assigned to it. It's just pointless. Unlike the calling code, +44, the domain of the UK is really not of interest to readers. That it states Northern Ireland is on Ireland, and part of the UK, which is part of the EU, should be enough for anyone to realise the domains of Ireland, the UK and the EU may be used in connection with Northern Ireland. Rob (talk | contribs) 16:01, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
I agree but so long as England, Scotland and Wales show these things, so will this article. --Tóraí (talk) 19:44, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
England doesn't, and I'll strongly contend any change there. I will edit Scotland and Wales and see how it goes. Rob (talk | contribs) 20:08, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
Same stuff different year? Wonder if that IPV6 address is that of a proxy? NI also has an Irish calling code in addition to the +44 code. There's reason that things are in encyclopedia like Wikipedia and that is because they are usually non-obvious. Either leave it as is or use Tóraí's suggestion. Things are going to become a bit more complex with the launch of some of the new gTLDs which will be relevant to Ireland and the UK. Jmccormac (talk) 20:26, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
I didn't know this had been brought up before, I have never edited the page or been involved in any discussions about it. 2001:470:28:103:C40:FDCB:70B6:A716 (talk) 01:49, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
We will have to cope with TLDs like .cmyru or .eng fairly shortly so I don't think removing them will solve anything. Personally I quite like the rwrite by Tóraí above of saying who administers the domain and for whom rather than just concentrating on political matters. Culture and identity also matter, there's too much concentration in the debate on being a subject and being governed, there's more to life in a country than that. Dmcq (talk) 22:13, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
I think there's a difference between generic top-level domains and ccTLDs. 2001:470:28:103:C40:FDCB:70B6:A716 (talk) 01:49, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
Noticed that now, I'd prefer that all UK country articles simply don't have the TLD field. Unless they're assigned ISO country codes and ccTLDs. See for example Åland, an autonomous part of Finland with its own ccTLD (.ax). 2001:470:28:103:C40:FDCB:70B6:A716 (talk) 01:55, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
I'm happy with Tóraí's proposition and not happy with Rob attempting to win an argument here by changing other articles (and then rejected a revert on each) ----Snowded TALK 07:34, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
I don't see how editing an article to support an argument elsewhere, makes the valid and presented reasoning for the edit any less valid. My reasoning presented here is exactly the same as for Scotland and Wales, I made the edits to see if they would be contentious there. Apparently, I can't make the same edit to 3 articles, even though I see an issue with all three? Rob (talk | contribs) 12:49, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
It would have been better to get your argument over first here. Trying once is okay but pushing your edits on both a second time rather than continuing with the discussion after the first time they were reverted is rather problematic. Dmcq (talk) 13:30, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
I see you deleted the Wales one three times now. Don't you think you are entering edit war territory? Dmcq (talk) 14:38, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
No. If you contended my reasoning for the edit (see the edit summary), then yes. But you didn't. Unless you have a reason for keeping the TLD, then why revert? Rob (talk | contribs) 14:55, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
Just to go with .cymru and .wales for the moment, would they be listed with Wales and why would .uk and .eu not also be listed with an appropriate description of their applicability? Dmcq (talk) 10:53, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
Because Wales, and the other countries are sub-divisions of the UK. We could say .uk is a TLD of every sub-division (London, Cornwall, etc) of the UK, but it's pointless. I will repeat, if someone wanted to know the TLD of the UK, they would visit the UK's article, not a sub-division of the UK. Unlike the calling code, which the reader may think is different for Wales, it's completely clear that the UK's domain may be used in connection with Wales, regardless of whether it's stated here. Do you think Wikipedia should state .ca is a TLD for Quebec also? It's just pointless. Rob (talk | contribs) 15:04, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
You say it is pointless, but why is it pointless? How do they know they should look elsewhere unless they already know the answer? Dmcq (talk) 15:25, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
See WP:IBX#Purpose of an infobox. Do you think we should state .uk on every UK sub-division so readers don't have to look else where? The infobox is suppose to 'summarize key facts in the article in which it appears', and the 'less information it contains, the more effectively it serves that purpose'. Rob (talk | contribs) 16:26, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
As I said it is not a question of having to look elsewhere. Putting in the restricted information actually obscures the other because people think they have a full answer but they don't. At least without anything there they know they have to search. Did you know you had special rights to a .eu domain because the UK is in the EEC? Dmcq (talk) 18:09, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
I see your point. However, like I said, that the articles state that the countries are part of the UK, of which most people are aware is a sovereign state (of which all have TLD), is sufficient. Besides, the UK's article doesn't list .eu, except in a note ref tag (of which at Wale's article would be appropriate for .uk and .eu). London will soon have its own domain, but listing .london without .uk also really isn't misleading. Rob (talk | contribs) 21:17, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
Well I've stated my reasons. You seem determined to go on about it despite the previous consensus so I think your options really are to give up or raise yet another RfC on the matter and hope that this this time round it comes to a different conclusion. I really don't think your argument that people should just know without any indication that the list is incomplete and will what to do about is very convincing. Dmcq (talk) 01:27, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
I think you're missing the point of an infobox. Rob (talk | contribs) 01:37, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Also, I'm fine with having a note ref, with .uk and .eu when there is other domains stated (as done at the UK's article). So there could be some indication that there are other domains that may be used in relation with Wales and Scotland, however at England and Northern Ireland, which lack proposed local domains, listing nothing is clear enough. Rob (talk | contribs) 03:35, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
What exactly am I supposed to be missing in WP:IBX#Purpose of an infobox? What is clear enough from listing nothing for Northern Ireland? What are the domains people in Northern Ireland have a special entitlement to use? Is it a key fact that people are interested in or not? Do you want to remove languages too, after all it has no official language and people can search for that themselves too. I think you need an RfC at this point, this talking back and forth doesn't look like it will lead to any meeting of minds and the previous consensus was a bit wider. A change would need a clear agreement, that's pretty unlikely, or another RfC to overrule. Dmcq (talk) 08:15, 2 February 2014 (UTC)


As well as .cymru, .wales, .scot and .london, 2014 will also bring us the joy of .irish.

Of these, .wales, .cymru and .london are listed as a geographic name, meaning the backing of government was required. .scot was applied for as a geographic, and has the backing of the Scottish government, but the name but was determined not to be a geographic name. .irish was not applied for as a geographic name and is forwarded as a gTLD for "the global Irish Diaspora". Nevertheless, I expect I expect there will desire to have it added here, in the same way that .scot and .wales will be added to those articles.

It will be coming on stream in 2014 (before .scot). I think we need to get ready for that. --Tóraí (talk) 10:38, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Well you can probably guess I'm not in favour of that either. It refers to a language, not a region. Rob (talk | contribs) 13:39, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
The "Irish" in .irish refers to Irish people, culture, interest, etc. not necessarily the Irish language. The Irish language isn't mentioned in the proposal. --Tóraí (talk) 14:43, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Tóraí is right. Generally only Irish people refer to Gaelic as 'Irish'. The real fun will begin if Scotland votes for Independence. This whole ie/uk NI argument seems to start up every year or so because a few people don't like reality. The past discussion was quite comical in that the proposition was voted down each time and the proposer even tried to have multiple votes when each one failed. There is no consensus for change and the inclusion of ie/uk/eu reflects the reality of the situation. Encyclopedia entries are not about imposing opinions. Jmccormac (talk) 15:03, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Eh? Do people outside Ireland refer to the language as Gaelic? I guess someone might say Irish Gaelic but Gaelic on its own as a noun normally means the very closely related language in Scotland. 16:28, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
I don't think a lot of people outside of Ireland and Scotland talk about Gaelic. But I would think Irish is most common, with Gaelic referring to both the Scottish and Irish variant. Rob (talk | contribs) 17:05, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
I'm not sure on the stats but it's certainly a long standing complaint by a lot of Irish speakers that the language is frequently not called "Irish" in English outside Ireland itself. This may be shifting a bit these days. Timrollpickering (talk) 11:36, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Overall, I think if something is complex and contentious, such as the TLDs, why not just avoid covering them in the infobox (or have a link to a section of the article stating See below), then explain in more detail, where the issue can be covered as best as possible, rather then trying to briefly summarise it in the infobox, which is both impractical, and defeats the purpose of the infobox? Rob (talk | contribs) 17:05, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

WRT the current set of ccTLDs, if consensus is to remove them from ENG/SCO/WAL then I have no issue with removing them form here. If they remain at ENG/SCO/WAL then they should remain here. .uk applies to ENG/SCO/WAL by virtue of them being in the UK. .uk and .ie apply to NI by virtue of it being in the UK and on the island of Ireland.
Talk:Northern Ireland isn't the venue to achieve that consensus, though. --Tóraí (talk) 19:13, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
NI is a special case therefore they should be left here. The explanation in the text of the article (with the TLDs remaining in the infobox with the link to the explanation was one suggestion in the previous discussions. However Nominet doesn't publish regional breakdowns of registration patterns. Jmccormac (talk) 21:06, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
I will start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:UK Wikipedians' notice board next week. Regards, Rob (talk | contribs) 21:55, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
The problem is that the NI article is not just a UK Wikipedians issue. And there is unlikely to be any people there with the expertise on domain name markets at a country level. Jmccormac (talk) 22:34, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
I don't think the market for a TLD is entirely relevant. In my own country, Sweden, a lot of companies / people register domains under the .nu TLD. "Nu" means now in Swedish. There's also .st, which is run by a Swedish ISP Bahnhof, but that isn't listed either. (talk) 00:39, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
They are not the same things. Please read the discussions in the archives to get a better understanding of why .ie/uk/eu are included in the NI infobox. Basically the .ie registrations are available to people in ROI and NI on an equal basis as is citizenship. This makes NI's position as regards domain names different. The .ie is a managed/restricted ccTLD where entitlement to the domain has to be proven first rather than an open TLD where anyone can register domain names. The .nu and .st ccTLDs are repurposed ccTLDs. Jmccormac (talk) 01:05, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Those are examples of domain hacks though, rather than intended usage. .uk is intended for the UK, of which NI is a part. .ie is intended for the island of Ireland, of which NI is a part; .eu is intended for the EU/EAA, of which NI is a part. Potentially, .irish (when it comes in) is intended for the world-wide Irish community, of which NI is a part. --Tóraí (talk) 08:44, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
In a sense, .ie for Northern Ireland is a domain hack then. Because "ie" is the Republic of Ireland. That's my point. 2001:470:28:103:4183:FADD:84AD:C11A (talk) 02:31, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
.ie is administered by the IEDR. Initially, registration for the domain was limited to the Republic of Ireland only. From 2002 onwards, it has been administer on all-Ireland basis. So, it is not a domain hack for entities in Northern Ireland to use .ie. That's the intended purpose per the administrating body. --Tóraí (talk) 08:23, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Neither of you are referring to domain hacks. Even if .ie's administrating body didn't intend all-Ireland usage, it wouldn't be a domain hack. Neither is .nu or .st. I understand what Jmccormac is trying to say however. There isn't technically much difference between domains such as .co, .nu and .st, and .ie as both intended usages by INAN, has been changed by the administrating bodies from representing their countries. Although .ie isn't open for international registration, it's still being used for an alternative purpose then intended by the INAN. I don't really think this matters however. The significant difference is that .nu and .st are internationalised, not localised like .ie. Rob (talk | contribs) 14:26, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
I don't believe it has ever been restricted to the Republic only, it has always been all Ireland. Where did you get this business about 2002 from? Dmcq (talk) 23:36, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
The .ie is not a domain hack. A domain hack is where the letter in the extension are used to spell a word ( for example). The .ie is also one of the earlier ccTLDs (26 years old this year) and it was delegated before ICANN even existed. The position of .ie with respect to the Irish internet community (North and South) was even stranger then. The E-commerce legislation was even more muddled and it took a lot of fixing to sort matters out. The .ie ccTLD applies to the island of Ireland and of course there is the whole parity of esteem thing from the GFA where not only can people choose their citizenship, they can choose their ccTLD. However many businesses in NI will have both a .ie and a .uk domain name for their business. The same applies with many ROI businesses. Initially registrations in .ie were free but much of the regulations about who could register what appeared later. The purpose of .ie remains unchanged. It is represents Ireland. The legislation even states that. The .nu, .st and .co are what are known as "repurposed" ccTLDs where they have been opened up to global registration because of the letters after the dot. Jmccormac (talk) 16:45, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
I don't believe this has any relevance to the discussion, but nonetheless...
You're not exactly correct. .ie is still only the ccTLD for the Republic of Ireland, and not the entire island. The Republic of Ireland is fully entitled to take all revenue from sales of .ie domains, and can decide all rules regarding its usage, including where it can be registered. Essentially the domain belongs to the Republic of Ireland, which allows registrations in Northern Ireland also. Its intended usage by the ICANN, is to represent the Republic of Ireland only, and the Irish administrating body has re-purposed it for all-Ireland usage, in the same way Colombia has re-purposed its domain for international usage.
This is an issue I see with many Ireland-related articles. The Irish government is a foreign government to Northern Ireland. The Irish Government has no authority over Northern Ireland, and too many articles suggest otherwise. Statements along the lines of 'Irish nationality law extends across the island of Ireland' and others similar are completely false.
No legislations in the Republic of Ireland extend over Northern Ireland. They simply grant Northern Irish people elements, and Northern Irish people are entitled to accept or reject these elements. For example, people born in Northern Ireland are not born dual citizens, they are born British citizens, and granted Irish citizenship, which they can choose whether to accept or reject.
And, rant over.
Rob (talk | contribs) 19:05, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Agree wholeheartedly. Just because the Republic has deemed that something spans the island doesn't mean it has that same status in a completely separate jurisdiction such as Northern Ireland whether they wish it did or not. Having said that, by virtue that people in Northern Ireland can buy a .ie domain name, and there are those that do, there is an argument for its inclusion on that basis. We can always add a footnote explaining? Otherwise I'd back the exclusion of .ie on the basis of how it was re-purposed. Mabuska (talk) 19:36, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
The Republic of Ireland is fully entitled to take all revenue from sales of .ie domains...
Just because the Republic has deemed...
IEDR is an independent body. No state body set it up. It grew inside University College Dublin, just as much of the internet grew from the worldwide university community.
Essentially the domain belongs to the Republic of Ireland...
No. Essentially, the domain is an entry in a database owned by ICANN. And, essentially, that database points at one managed by IEDR. The US government ultimately controls the ICANN entry, though they manage it in the public trust and in trust for the international community.
On the basis of the rant that this discussion is turning into, I suggest this discussion has reached an end once more. I think the only thing there is consensus for is to amend the footnote for clarity, which I will do now. --Tóraí (talk) 20:36, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
If we're being scrupulous then...
'In the case of top-level domains that are country codes this means that there is a manager that supervises the domain names and operates the domain name system in that country... ...For top-level domains that are country codes at least the administrative contact must reside in the country involved.'
'The designated manager is the trustee of the top-level domain for both the nation, in the case of a country code, and the global Internet community.'
The Irish administrating body must act within the interest of the Republic of Ireland, not the entire island. And countries evidently are allowed to monetise their ccTLD, so I see no reason why the Republic of Ireland is any less entitled to do so, if it wanted to.
This is clearly a re-purposed domain.
But yes, this is really irrelevant here.
Rob (talk | contribs) 21:14, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
No it is not a repurposed domain. That phrase has a specific meaning within the domain name industry and generally refers to a ccTLD that has been opened up and often commercially licenced to a company to run as something other than a ccTLD. This seems to be a problem with people seeing domain industry terms and creating their own interpretations. Indeed much of this discussion and most of the previous discussions have been filled with such issues. Jmccormac (talk) 21:30, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
This whole issue has been explained in the previous discussions. Perhaps people who are apparently new to all this should read them to get a greater understanding of what is going on here. The .ie ccTLD was not repurposed. This include/exclude .ie seems to occur every year or so and it results in the same incorrect arguments being made and no consensus to change the set of TLDs. Jmccormac (talk) 20:50, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
If it isn't re-purposed then why wasn't it delegated to a cross-border body? Why does the Irish Minister for Public Enterprise have the power to make regulations regarding the registration of .ie domain names? Obviously because it's assigned to the Republic of Ireland, who have re-purposed it. It seems clear that whatever previous discussions have been had are based on incorrect information. I don't actually care in this instance, but it's another example of the Irish Government-Northern Ireland crap on portrayed on Wikipedia. Rob (talk | contribs) 21:32, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Because it is not a repurposed ccTLD. The reality is that .ie, .uk and .eu are (apart from the gTLDs) the most used domains in NI. NI registrations are treated on the same basis as registrations from ROI. UK (Wales, England, Scotland) registrations in .ie have to prove entitlement and substantial connection to the island of Ireland. The .ie applies to the island of Ireland and substantial numbers of .ie registrations are NI registrations. Jmccormac (talk) 21:50, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Are you kidding me. .ie is the ccTLD for the Republic of Ireland. Registration has been assigned to the IE Domain Registry, which allows registration for organisations and individuals in Northern Ireland with no connection with the Republic of Ireland, of who the domain is the ccTLD for, as assigned by ICANN. .ie is obvious a country code TLD, that is assigned by ICANN to a country, not an island. Northern Ireland does not form part of the country called the Republic of Ireland. This, therefore is a re-purposed domain. What is difficult to understand? Rob (talk | contribs) 22:02, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
The .ie is not a repurposed ccTLD no more than .uk is a repurposed ccTLD. Now .nu, .st and .co are repurposed ccTLDs. The term was explained earlier. And .ie is not assigned to the IE Domain Registry. Jmccormac (talk) 22:12, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Right pal. Rob (talk | contribs) 22:40, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
If it isn't re-purposed then why wasn't it delegated to a cross-border body?
Telecommunications, broadcasting and internet services are reserved matters. As such, the Northern Ireland Assembly has no responsibility for them and they cannot be delegated to a cross-border body. Furthermore, as stated repeatedly, the IEDR is not a state body.
Now, have we finished with this matter? --Tóraí (talk) 22:46, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Is this discussion concluded? Nope. But since really, this doesn't affect my view on whether .ie should be included (although it may affect others), I don't see any point in continuing. Regards, Rob (talk | contribs) 22:54, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed[edit]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: here. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and according to fair use may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 01:50, 22 May 2014 (UTC)


Should "Wildlife" be included? Will have to think about this.Osborne 15:27, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

I suppose we could have a wildlife section, though the wildlife in the countryside could hardly be called wild when you compare it to the wildlife in Stormont. Mabuska (talk) 22:42, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 June 2014[edit]

include actor and model Jamie Dornan from Holywood in list of famous people from Northern Ireland. Ashcarden (talk) 09:36, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done:The page where he should be added is List of people from Northern Ireland. That page isn't semi-protected so you should be able to do it yourself. Sarahj2107 (talk) 10:11, 13 June 2014 (UTC)