Talk:Southern Ireland (1921–1922)

Section headers

I have sectioned this article and removed the section tag, hopefully the headings will be suitable.--padraig3uk 11:47, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Southern Ireland

The below text is a copy of a discussion which took place on the Northern Ireland talk page and was copied and pasted here by User:Sarah777. --sony-youth^pléigh 13:26, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

As, indeed, User:Sarah777 had already pointed out in a signed comment!(Sarah777 14:29, 25 April 2007 (UTC))

---

What's this Southern Ireland article about with Southern Ireland ?? This "state" co-existed in the same space and time as the Irish Republic/Free State, did it? How does that work?!!(Sarah777 21:20, 24 April 2007 (UTC))

Southern Ireland was the state the British tried to create with partition, the election in 1921 was supposed to be an election to this, but was regarded by Sinn Féin as an election to the second Dáil, the Southern Ireland House of Commons met only twice the first time only 5 members attended, and the second time to endorce the treaty, but only after this was already passed by Dáil Éireann first and was just a formality.--padraig3uk 22:39, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

So it was a state of mind rather than a state! Can we write an article on the sovereign state of Ruritania? I believe Groucho Marx was it's President sometime in the 1930s - seems to have rather more reality than "Southern Ireland"? (Sarah777 22:53, 24 April 2007 (UTC))

Well according to British constitutional law it existed, but under Irish constitutional law it didn't, either way it was replaced by the Irish Free State.--padraig3uk 23:03, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Southern Ireland existed and, regardless of its brevity, its importance to Irish and British history is notable.

FYI: There is an article on Ruritania. It was a fictional state and not an Irish one so it does not belong in the template. --sony-youth^pléigh 08:07, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

When did it exist? And how could it co-exist in space and time with another state? (Sarah777 10:36, 25 April 2007 (UTC))

Sarah if you read the article it will explain when it existed, the fact is it did exist and is part of Ireland history, even if it wasn't recognised by the majority of people elected to it, I have also split this discussion off from the template debate above.--padraig3uk 11:26, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Sarah, take it to the Southern Ireland talk page. This page is for Northern Ireland. --sony-youth^pléigh 11:31, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Nope folks, read the article. It clearly didn't exist - any more than Ruritania did. Therein lies the solution perhaps. As explained, it is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for two different states to co-exist in the same space and time. Therefore all counter-arguments fall. Self-evidently. (Sarah777 11:40, 25 April 2007 (UTC))

Are you still here? Go to Talk:Southern Ireland. --sony-youth^pléigh 11:42, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes Sony, still here.

The amended template would run something like as follows:

... Irish Republic | Southern Ireland | Northern Ireland | Irish Free State ... [Sony, 20th April, on this page]

So it's part of the discussion, is it not? I would have trouble with any template including fictional states in the stream of Irish history. And please don't tell me to 'go away'. I'm sure that breaches several Wiki policies. (Sarah777 11:48, 25 April 2007 (UTC))

Sarah, it is not our purpose here to write out of history everything we may disagree with, Southern Ireland existed in law and that fact cannot be ignored, shall we also ignore the 1921 election that created it as well, the same election that Sinn Féin used to elect the Second Dáil.--padraig3uk 11:57, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Yet again, I will point out the obvious: it is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for two different states to co-exist in the same space and time. So, it didn't exist. The elections held were for the Second Dail, which formed immediately and was successor to the First. Unless you are saying that the decision of the elected representatives of the Irish people has no weight and that the Second Dail didn't exist? This is not 'wishing' anything; it is establishing fact and removing POV. "Southern Ireland" was a British legal fiction. Not a real state in any sense of the word. (Sarah777 12:04, 25 April 2007 (UTC))

Sarah the first and second Dáil, whilst recognised by the Irish people existed along side a British administration during the War of Independence. Now if you want to discuss this further take it to the Southern Ireland talkpage.--padraig3uk 12:21, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Padraig, the inclusion of a fictional state in any Ireland-related template is a matter of concern. I'm not sure the issues can be separated. If the two states existed ALONGSIDE one another then the 'stream' of states in the template is completely misleading. Also, I will categorise "Southern Ireland" under both "Short-Lived" and "Fictional" states until this issue is resolved. Regards (Sarah777 12:49, 25 April 2007 (UTC))

---

Sony, I specifically asked that you not revert my correction to the infobox. This template appears in the article:

Can you please explain why the Irish Republic precedes "Southern Ireland" here - but not at the top of the article? (Sarah777 14:27, 25 April 2007 (UTC))

Because the template is wrong, and needs updating.--padraig3uk 14:40, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I updated the template to include the dates.--padraig3uk 14:49, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you Padraig, at least now it is consistent. I am starting to get rather annoyed when some folk here refer to corrections made to blindingly obvious errors as "vandalism". Especially when they have admitted in the past that they don't assume good faith. (I don't refer to padraig3uk (Sarah777 15:14, 25 April 2007 (UTC))

Mixing personal attacks and discussion again, Sarah? --sony-youth^pléigh 15:24, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

The tempate shows the states as they appear in chronology:

1801 - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland

1916 - Irish Republic

1921 - Southern Ireland

1922 - Irish Free State

The info box shows how the states as the appear in succession:

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland -> Irish Republic

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland -> Southern Ireland

Irish Republic/Southern Ireland -> Irish Free State

Please see other former states infoboxes for further examples. --sony-youth^pléigh 15:22, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes Sony, it is much better now, thanks to my efforts to point out the errors. (And Padraig of course). As you well know I have a strict policy of NEVER indulging in personal attacks except in RESPONSE to personal attacks. Polite folk will never read a harsh word from me.

You really are keeping a close eye on me - I don't know whether to be flattered or annoyed. (Sarah777 15:42, 25 April 2007 (UTC))

Sarah, I watch the pages in my watchlist for the content editors contribute to them, not which editors contribute to them. We obviously share the same watchlist, but little else.

Exactly what "errors" you pointed out - I thought from you contributions copied from the NI page, copied above, that Southern Ireland was a "fictional" state and that it way "physically impossible" (emphasis removed, you had it capitalised) that two states could exist alongside each other?

The states template has the been source of a lot of interest of late (me also, fixing flags etc.), I'm planning of re-arrengint it to show succession rather than chronology. Think it may be better (clearer, more informative). You? --sony-youth^pléigh 16:28, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Sony, I read your outrageous comments about me on the "British" Isles Talk. Were I very sensitive I would not reply too you. The ERROR was that before Padraig fixed it, the template implied there was no Irish Republic in 1922. When I pointed out that the template at the bottom would imply the flag sequence in the top box should go tricolour-jack-tricolour and changed the flag you reverted to the inconsistent version. Padraig, seeing the problem, fixed the bottom template.

This is about internal consistency; the issue of having an article about a fictional state (which "Southern Ireland" clearly is) is a separate matter. However I think this dispute can be simply resolved by placing "Southern Ireland" along with Ruritania in the "Fictional States" category (there actually is one!).

Any objections to this proposal? (Sarah777 16:49, 25 April 2007 (UTC))

Clearly there would be, but if that's a tree in your POV forest then by all means bark up it. My only response will be to post a notice that you have done so on the Ireland project page and ask for comment.

However, at least we are agreed about the template? Personally, I didn't see an issue before, nor would I have called it an internal inconsistency, but, if you have no problem with me changing the template to reflect succession, I do up a trial first and post it on the talk page there. --sony-youth^pléigh 16:56, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Sarah, I think you would get many objections to such a proposal, I would revert any attempt to do.--padraig3uk 16:57, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Sony - need to see it first, not 100% sure what you are proposing. Padraig; you have already done so once - you'd run out of reverts! I take it from both of you that is a "no"? (Sarah777 17:03, 25 April 2007 (UTC))

It's worth noting, though I am a while late for this discussion, that separate states often exist in the same place at the same time. See, for example the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus... legally, it doesn't exist anywhere but in Turkey yet it is the de facto government in the areas it claims. Or the Palestinian Authority for that matter. -MichiganCharms 19:23, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Southern Ireland as an unofficial name for the Republic of Ireland

The article originally said that "Southern Ireland" was an "unofficial" name for the Republic of Ireland. However, I have not spoken to a single Irish person who would refer to the Republic of Ireland as "Southern Ireland". However, I have met many tourists who erroneously refer to the country as "Southern Ireland" as they don't know its official name but are aware that the territory in the North is referred to as "Northern Ireland" - whether they actually realise it is considered a separate country is another issue entirely! I was in Australia recently and overheard two young Englishmen planning the next leg of their world tour. They decided to finish up in Ireland. They decided "Northern Ireland" was probably a safer option for them, as being from England they were more likely to run into trouble in "Southern Ireland." (The opposite is probably true!) Also, of the two links that are given to support the assertion that "Southern Ireland" is a legitimate "unofficial name", one of them is dead, while the other could easily be referring to the more southern part of the Republic of Ireland (e.g. counties Kerry, Cork, Clare) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.71.60.88 (talk) 00:50, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I think your new edit is fine. Thanks for the input. Logoistic 13:51, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

"(The opposite is probably true!)" what a slanderous and totally inaccurate and unsubstantiated comment !!!