Talk:Belfast/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

Ulster capital?

A couple of points:

  • does "Ulster" really have a "capital"? - a capital city is an active administrative role - "Ulster" is just a traditional/historical/geographical division of the island of Ireland. Perhaps it should say "was" the capital of Ulster? (was there a king there centuries ago?)
  • The article says Belfast's site has been inhabited since Iron Age times, but also claims it has been riven by sectarian strife for "most" of its existence. Since the Iron Age predates even CHRISTIANITY by many many centuries, never mind the Reformation, this is clearly an exageration! Was there sectarian strife in Belfast prior to partition in Ireland?

--feline1 07:49, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

Good points...
Ulster has not ever been an administrative unit so, yes I suppose it's not technically correct to say Belfast was the capital of Ulster... but that's the way people think of it, so I think it's a reasonable entry.
Sectarian strife was rife in Belfast in the 19th Century, developing particularly with mass immigration from places like County Armagh and South Derry were sectarian tensions had been high pretty much since the plantation. I'm not aware of any sectarian strife in the Iron Age! I'll fix.

Gerry Lynch 11:42, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

If Ulster had a capital wouldn't it be Armagh? Historically it was of a lot more significance than Belfast, and was the historical capital. See the first paragraph here: http://www.visit-armagh.com/ . Despite that though, is it worth having the 'capital of Ulster'? It's a very notional thing, and doesn't really add a lot to the article.

Ben Bulben 15:32, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'm not fussed personally, but no Belfast is definitely the capital of Ulster insofar as it has one. Ulster cultural and sporting institutions are based there, which sort of has to do as there are no Ulster wide administrative functions. Gerry Lynch 13:35, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

But that's the whole point - Ulster currently doesn't exist as a political or administrative entity, and therefore doesn't have a capital. However, presumeably the ancient kingdom of Ulster did have a captial (ie, the king had his seat somewhere)? If this was in Armagh, then Armagh was the capital of Ulster, not Belfast, and thus the respective articles should be corrected.--feline1 14:39, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

I've added two photos of murals in Belfast, and they are arranged to display only at the relevant section. There are more such photos available on Wikipedia Commons but I would suggest that we do not want to overpower the article and merely focus on sectarianism in Belfast.

Hopefully some more photos of Belfast would be forthcoming, any editors visiting the city or readers of this message could perhaps upload some photos.

Not all of the murals are sectarian, for example, the one of George Best or the one of David Healy scoring against England --Candymk2 (talk) 18:47, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

zoney talk 22:05, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Nationalists zealot PoV Mentalists

And yes, I am talking about *ewe* today, Lapsed Pacifist - why in the name of the sweet baby Jesus would an encylopedia article about Belfast (or indeed about any city in the world) not want to mention what country that city was in (currently the UK)? The fact that tedious nationalist zealots have similarly vandalized the Edinburgh article is no justification. This sort of behaviour is just juvenile. This is encyclopedia, on the Internet so people round the world can look up facts, not some vanity project to satisfy personal agendas. When Mrs B.Burgerbucket of Arkansas reads the article, it might be nice for her to be able to tell that Belfast is in the UK, not in Ireland or Norway or France. Perhaps we should, in the interests of balance and objectivity, add some stuff to the population section, where we explain "A large percentage of the population of Belfast are bigoted morons."--feline1 10:10, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

I have no problem with letting anyone from Arkansas know under which state's jurisdiction Belfast falls. However, "to be able to tell that Belfast is in the UK, not in Ireland" strikes me as less than precise. If you believe the behaviour of the contributors to the Edinburgh article is juvenile, you'll have to take it up with them. As regards "A large percentage of the population of Belfast are bigoted morons.", there's an element of truth in that, although it should probably be phrased more neutrally.

Lapsed Pacifist 11:17, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

/sighs/ OK, "...to be able to tell that Belfarce is in the UK, not the Republic of Ireland or Norway or France..." then. (I was not being as precise on a talk page as the articles themselves need to be, as ewe knew perfectly well what I meant!) Give me strength!--feline1 11:58, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
I think it is unneccessary to use United Kingdom, "Northern Ireland" would be quite sufficent because of its relationship with the UK - which is largely known by many and if not then one might aught to click on the link and "dig deeper" and find out for oneself. Djegan 20:07, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
That's like saying everyone knows that the Cayman Islands are under British rule, simply "just" because they are. NI isn't the most famous place in the world and neither are the Cayman Islands but all the same in the interest of fact things need to be stated, NI being the UK is one of them.
Three things in life are certain. Death, taxes and Nationalists refusing to believe they walk on British soil. Though I am biased in talk pages, I'm sure everyone can agree it's fact they do. --Flag of the United Kingdom (3-5).svgDom0803 20:13, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

We're not Brazil; we're Northern Ireland! I think Northern Ireland should be used in most situations, and only if need be should we say "United Kingdom" (when talking of the Union with Britain) "European Union" (when talking of the Union in Europe) or "Ireland" (when talking of the island). Not only is it politically unbias, it's only a cold hard fact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.71.134.247 (talk) 16:13, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Is Northern Irelnd not a country, no? Im 17 and i can tell that. Maybe there should be a contribution in the article mentioning that Belfast people would argue in an empty house. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.131.72.182 (talk) 19:30, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

WW2

I've removed the reference to World War Two - Belfast was bombed a grand total of twice in 1941, and it is simply inaccurate to say that much of the city was flattened. If anyone puts it back could they do so with a bit more perspective, please? Belfast in WW2 was not bombed to anything like the degree of most big English cities... let alone Berlin or Leningrad! Gerry Lynch 15:28, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

Gerry, I suggest that deV sending up the Fire brigade deserves a mention --ClemMcGann 22:54, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Sounds sensible. Gerry Lynch 13:35, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
A large area around St. Anne's Cathedral was destroyed; it must be remembered that Belfast is very small, so it doesn't take a lot to flatten 'large sections'- Fionnuala
Outside of London, Belfast was one of the most heavily damaged cities in the UK during World War II. --Mal 20:48, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Use of Foreign Language

All references to Irish language should be removed from this article. Why don't we use the Chinese translation of Dublin in that article. British cities don't have Irish names. Belfast is in the UK. English is the language of the UK; not Irish, not Urdu etc. If Irish speaking people don't like that small but significant fact they should move to the Republic.

Balmoral Unionist (talk) 17:27, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

See, for example Glasgow (Scots: Glesga; Scottish Gaelic: Glaschu) and Cardiff (Welsh: Caerdydd). The UK uses many regional languages. English is not the official language of the UK: the UK's body of laws includes statutes in Norman French, for example. Cheers, TFOWRThis flag once was red 17:38, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Consensus is to include Irish names for geographic articles relating to Ireland, if you have a problem with consensus then perhaps Wikipedia is not the place for you. O Fenian (talk) 17:43, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Consensus, what consensus? Appeasing Irish terrorists and Fenians? It's a British city in a British country. I despise the virulent attempts of nationalists to de-anglicize a truly wonderful British city. I've no problem with Irish translations being used for Irish villages. But for great British cities, it should not be included, no more than any other foreign languages.


Balmoral Unionist (talk) 17:49, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

The consensus at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Ireland-related articles). O Fenian (talk) 18:04, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

I would ask you to refrain from sectarian/bigoted language please, Balmoral Unionist, it adds nothing to discussion and has no place on this website. The Irish language is the native language of the island of Ireland, and the name "Belfast" comes from the Irish language. On a related note, the Irish language is not a "nationalist" language, it is the native language of Ireland and has been spoken/studied by unionists as well as nationalists for generations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.188.157.51 (talk) 10:42, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

City size comparison

according to this source http://www.ukcities.co.uk/populations/ , Belfast is the 17th largest city in the UK. Is there any objection to include this fact in the text? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.172.119.191 (talk) 22:18, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes. What relevance does its size in comparison to other UK cities have to its history? It being the second largest city in Ireland is clearly relevant to its and Northern Ireland's history. O Fenian (talk) 22:20, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
not quite sure what the argument is here as the content change suggested is not in the history section. And as Northern Ireland is in UK, I can see the point in including the fact that Belfast is the 17th largest city in the UK. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.183.37.221 (talk) 12:41, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Most other British cities have size comparisons (albeit English cities being compared within England) very few of which have any significance to their history - examples I looked up are Leeds, Manchester and also Plymouth, which has a similar population count to Belfast. There isn't any valid reason why its size-comparison with other UK cities should not be included. ★KEYS767talk 13:38, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
The 17th largest is not notable enough to be included. Mo ainm~Talk 14:03, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Says who? I think it is worth noting. No point comparing city sizes between 2 different countries? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.184.183.49 (talk) 17:12, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
If you want to change it, you get consensus. 17th largest in the UK is virtually a trivia item. I can provide many reliable secondary sources that note Belfast's status as the second largest on the island, you have a directory entry on a list. The notability factor is clearly the former. O Fenian (talk) 17:18, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Here is a few for starters.
Music Ministry: A Guidebook by Donald Clark Measels (ISBN 978-1573124140), page 2
Ireland the land by Erinn Banting (ISBN 978-0778793496), page 16
World and Its Peoples (ISBN 9780761478836), page 125
Ireland: a reference guide from the Renaissance to the present by John Patrick McCarthy (ISBN 978-0816053780), page 192
FreeToDo Travel Guides - UK and Ireland by Lynne and Ronald Wallace Hogg (ISBN 978-0955360008), page 345
There are many, many more. What sources note the "17th biggest in the UK"? Reliable sources decide what is of note, not editors. O Fenian (talk) 17:31, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
I support O Fenian on this, Belfast as the second city of the island of Ireland shows the importance of Belfast as a City, in contrast, stating Belfast is the 17th largest city in the UK is laughable and unencyclopaedic. I would also note that the city population proper is only low due to the troubles as swathes of people moved to the outskirts out side the city boundary. --NorthernCounties (talk) 17:34, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Also support O Fenian on this. 17th largest is just trivia. Bjmullan (talk) 17:39, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/theme_compendia/fom2005/03_FOPM_UrbanAreas.pdf - here is a link to a government Document. I would consider this source pretty reliable and more factual than the sources quoted above from independent Authors. what do you think? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.184.83.156 (talk) 13:53, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

You have missed the point. That is a table of "The 25 most populous urban areas in the United Kingdom: resident population and population density", which includes Belfast by default as it is in the top 25. You have not provided any sources that when writing about Belfast generally have specifically chosen to include its comparative size within the UK, unlike the sources I have provided that deal with its comparative size within Ireland. O Fenian (talk) 19:16, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
since when should that matter? The source I provided backs up the suggested change and is from a source that is completely neutral. And is a noteworthy fact given that Belfast is in the United Kingdom. To say that Belfast is the 2nd largest city within 2 countries is pointless. Can you guarantee neutrality of the sources you have provided given that they are from independent authors. O Fenian, you are forgetting that this is the Belfast Wikipedia page, not your personal page! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.184.83.156 (talk) 11:39, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
I assume you realise that it is also not "your personal page" either? O Fenian (talk) 09:27, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
I knew it wasn't my personal page when you started dictating the content. Aside from that, you have ignored my previous post. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.184.83.156 (talk) 14:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
It was addressed in my previous post. If the 11th/15th/17th/whatever sized city comparison is so important that it needs to be covered in the first sentence in the lead, then it will have been covered by sources that talk about Belfast in general as opposed to mere lists that give the ranking by default. O Fenian (talk) 21:21, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
If you had addressed my post, I wouldn't of asked you a 2nd time. Why should it matter? To suggest that an authors opinion decides what facts are notable is slightly ignorant. If the suggested content is correct and worth noting then it should be included, but having looked at some of your posts on other topics, I can see that there is perhaps an underlying reason to your objection. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.184.83.156 (talk) 11:09, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
This discussion is achieving nothing. 17th City is not notable, 2nd City is. If you wish to continue this argument/discussion, please do so without the veil of an unregistered IP. --NorthernCounties (talk) 12:40, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
I'll set up an account then. Just didn't think Wiki would suck me in. Well from what I have seen on other cities pages of a similar size to Belfast, the UK city size comparison fact seems to be notable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.184.83.156 (talk) 17:29, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
Which city pages do you believe have the UK size comparison in the first sentence? O Fenian (talk) 17:32, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
I am not saying that it has to be included in the opening line but I think it is worth noting somewhere in the text. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.184.83.156 (talk) 17:48, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
Please don't back track. Answer O Fenians question please. --NorthernCounties (talk) 19:33, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Aberdeen, Glasgow, Bristol, Edinburgh all seem to consider their comparable size in terms of the UK notable. There. question answered. Now, O Fenian, remind me again what a city's size has to do with its history? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.184.83.156 (talk) 21:02, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

You did not answer the question - which of those have their comparison in the first sentence of the article? Belfast's size has quite a lot to do with its history, why do you think it was chosen as the capital of the statelet? Am I to assume from your previous comment that you are no longer in favour of including the UK size comparison in the first sentence, but including it somewhere else? O Fenian (talk) 21:58, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
You can lead a horse to water but....All 4 of the cities I have given you all carry the UK city size comparison in their opening sentence. Capital cities are not chosen solely based on their population. You only have to look at America, Canada and even Scotland to name but a few. Are you suggesting that we move the city size comparison to the history section? And...please focus on the topic at hand. I see you are still coming to terms with Northern Ireland as a country but this not the time or the place for that discussion so please ...eyes focused. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.184.83.156 (talk) 22:24, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
Is there any further objection to this change. Im guessing no, given that O Fenian, the main objector has not replied to this post, but has in the same time replied to the topic below? It seems that any Article relating to Northern Ireland is falling between a rock and a hard place given that it is on the Ireland but is a part of the UK. So I can see the inclusion for the British City comparison fact aswell as the Irish one. Probably equal in merit, although Belfast falls further down the list in size in uk terms, the cities in Ireland are so much smaller.Afterlife10 (talk) 21:37, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
I count four objectors, and yes there is still opposition to the change, especially as a specific change with sources has yet to be proposed. How many UK cities do not include the comparison in the first sentence? O Fenian (talk) 21:39, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
ohh I love jokes. ok, how many UK cities do not include the comparison in the first sentence? A source has already been provided and the suggested change is the same edit that you had previously reverted. (Better make sure to leave plenty of space between my name and post). Afterlife10 (talk) 22:09, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
The statistics.gov source is no use for this article. Which edit are you talking about? Just post the exact text of what you are proposing. O Fenian (talk) 22:14, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Here was the original suggestion that you reverted. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Belfast&action=historysubmit&diff=404054597&oldid=404053867. The statistics.gov source is acceptable.Afterlife10 (talk) 01:09, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

I can only assume you have not actually read the source then..and that particular suggestion has been rejected by four editors O Fenian (talk) 01:10, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
I guess we could use any of the sources provided here then - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_United_Kingdom_settlements_by_population#cite_note-3. They seem valid enough. I do understand that yes 4 User Accounts disagree with the content suggestion, whether the reasons are without a hinden agenda or not. But certainly as the UK city size comparison fact has been used at other city wp pages with populations smaller than Belfast, it would suggest that the greater wiki community grant it note worthy.Afterlife10 (talk) 23:35, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Suggested content:
Belfast (Irish: Béal Feirste, "mouth of the sandbars") is the capital of and largest city in Northern Ireland, the second largest city on the island of Ireland, and falls 15th on the list of largest UK Cities.Afterlife10 (talk) 00:14, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
No. Four editors are against it. O Fenian (talk) 10:09, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes 4 User Accounts did object initially, but 3 of those User Accounts have since left the discussion. I wouldn't use the word editor given that you have not made any edits, only reverts. The fact enhances the article so can have no reasonable objection I have provided sources and suggested content and also shown that it is a notable fact. I think I have jumped through enough hoops to show that a UK city size comparison is note worthy. O_Fenian, I am guessing that you probably monitor the 'Ireland' wiki page. Do you have any objection to it having noted that it is the 20th largest Island on the planet? How about a compromise? What if we said Belfast is the 16th largest city on the British Isles. That way the fact is inclusive of the UK and ROI.Afterlife10 (talk) 20:54, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
Would you like to answer the question about how many cities in the UK do not include the information in the opening line? O Fenian (talk) 20:56, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
Are you suggesting that we move the city size comparison to the history section?

What is wrong with using the statistics.gov source? (Ref: Ireland) Do you have any objection to it having noted that it is the 20th largest Island on the planet? Also you said in your revert that you had set up a discussion on this topic at the guideline talk page but couldn't find it there? Ok answer these questions from previous posts as she seem to have forgotten to answer them. Also, as for your question, perhaps you could do your own research?Afterlife10 (talk) 21:08, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

It should be included, since Belfast is within the United Kingdom. GoodDay (talk) 15:44, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
The UK comparison seems to add value to the article to me for two resaons:
  • It is a useful additional context. Obviously the difference between 15th and 17th is less significant then the difference between 1st and 2nd, or 2nd and 3rd, but that doesn't make 15th largest trivia. "Big by Irish standards, medium-sized by British standards" is an important idea to get across to a reader trying to understand the city, and the potential significance of this context for other aspects of the city (eg its history and politics) must be sufficient to earn it a place in the lead.
  • For a city whose Britishness/Irishness is so obviously and bitterly contested, presenting it in both contexts has obvious benefits for maintaining NPOV.
JimmyGuano (talk) 07:32, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
"What is wrong with using the statistics.gov source?" It is nothing to do with this article. The UK comparison has no place in the first line of the article, four editors are against its inclusion. Please stop edit warring to include it there. Since you have not answered my question, I will answer it for you. Out of the top 25 the following UK cites do not include the comparison in the first sentence - Bradford, Cardiff, Coventry, Derby, Dudley, Kingston upon Hull, Leeds, Leicester, Liverpool, London, Manchester, Newcastle upon Tyne, Northampton, Nottingham, Plymouth, Reading, Berkshire, Sheffield, Southampton, Stoke-on-Trent, Wolverhampton. 20 in total, out of 25. This is not a uniform standard that is not being intentionally excluded from this article clearly. O Fenian (talk) 09:19, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
O_Fenian, you are the only user who is against its usage. Try answering these questions?

Are you suggesting that we move the city size comparison to the history section? What is wrong with using the statistics.gov source? (Ref: Ireland) Do you have any objection to it having noted that it is the 20th largest Island on the planet? Also you said in your revert that you had set up a discussion on this topic at the guideline talk page but couldn't find it there? Ok answer these questions from previous posts as she seem to have forgotten to answer them.

I'll remind you that this is not your personal page, so don't feel you can dictate content on your own.Afterlife10 (talk) 10:16, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

My answer was - "What is wrong with using the statistics.gov source?" It is nothing to do with this article. Stop wasting time by not even botherering to read posts or the source. If you had read the source, you would understand why it is no use for this article.
I have read the source. It proves that Belfast is 15th largest city in the UK, therefore supporting the content. So I don't see a problem with it. What is wrong with using the statistics.gov source? And this time answer the question with a reason, not another suggesting to read the source again.Afterlife10 (talk) 14:23, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
"I have read the source. It proves that Belfast is 15th largest city in the UK, therefore supporting the content. So I don't see a problem with it. What is wrong with using the statistics.gov source?". Thank you for proving beyond any doubt that you have not read the source at all. The statistics.gov source (http://www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/theme_compendia/fom2005/03_FOPM_UrbanAreas.pdf for the sake of anyone not wishing to look through the entire discussion for it) does not prove at all that Belfast is the 15th largest city in the UK. If you wish to still claim it does, I suggest providing a page number from the PDF. O Fenian (talk) 15:47, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
The Ireland article is nothing to do with this page.
It kind of is given that Belfast is on the island of Ireland. I was just asking for your opinion. Yes or no?Afterlife10 (talk) 14:23, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
I did not state I had started a discussion on this topic. I still count four editors against the inclusion of the trivia item in the opening sentence, that they do not feel the need to continually respond to this dead horse flogging does not negate their objections. O Fenian (talk) 10:43, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
This isn't a dead horse, it's very obviously an active and on-going debate that hasn't been resolved. Saying that four editors have posted opinions opposing something so therefore the discussion is over and the matter settled (conveniently on the side that you favour) is no more constructive than the edit-warring that you rightly criticise.
In addition to the two points I've posted above there's a third reason which to me suggests that the comparison should be included. Surely the first and most significant single fact about Belfast for a reader of this article to understand is that it is physically on Ireland but politically (rightly or wrongly) it is in the United Kingdom not the Republic of Ireland? Without understanding this basic fact it is impossible to understand the city's recent history, its politics, its economics or significant aspects of its cultural and sporting life. Quite apart from the importance of comparative population figures, at the moment the lead states that the city is "in Ireland" in a way that doesn't make it clear that it is referring to the island not the state, and doesn't give any indication that it is in the UK. It is therefore failing in its primary task, by being actively misleading about the the subject's pivotal issue.
JimmyGuano (talk) 11:28, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
When there are comments such as "Yes 4 User Accounts did object initially, but 3 of those User Accounts have since left the discussion", would you agree it is more than reasonable to state that their objections are still valid in the absence of anything new being brought to the discussion? I have nothing against the inclusion of the item at a later point in the lead, but I consider the 15th/17th/whatever inclusion in the first sentence to be nothing more than a trivia item. I am sure there is a better way of emphasising that Northern Ireland is part of the UK, for the benefit of the three people in the world that do not know that already.. O Fenian (talk) 11:34, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
The departure of the other objectors doesn't make their points null and void, and the issues they raised can't just be ignored, you're right. The consensus process is supposed to involve us all discussing the issue until we come up some wording that all or most of us are comfortable with, however, and the other posters can't take part in this if they're not posting here any more, so the fact of their objection (as distinct from the substance of their objection) can't hold up progress on the issue for ever.
I take your (and the three other objecting posters) point about 15th/17th being quite a large number to highlight in the lead. We wouldn't highlight the fact that Bangor was the 276th or whatever largest town in wherever, so we need to draw a line somewhere. In Belfast's case this isn't clear cut because as both sides of the argument have pointed out, there are smaller cities that include the comparison and larger ones that don't, so it falls into the grey area. I still feel that my "medium sized by British standards" argument stands up though - the fact that Belfast has more relative significance in an Irish context than it does in a UK one, despite being politically in the UK rather than Ireland, is a paradox that is significant for the city's history and its present.
As to only three people not knowing that Belfast is in the UK, I suspect most people know that Paris is the capital of France too, but that is still rightly the first sentence of the lead of Paris's article, because it is still the most important single fact about the city. Phrases somehow including wording along the lines of "in the United Kingdom" and "on the island of Ireland" has got to be right at the top of the lead IMO - because this combination of facts is so pivotal to the wider understanding of the subject. Giving the two population comparisons would seem the easiest way of doing this, and the tactic used to achieve the equivalent task on most other city articles, but it might well not be the only way. What would you suggest as an alternative?
JimmyGuano (talk) 12:18, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
The lead of the Monasterevin article feels moved to explain that it is "the 11th largest town in Kildare and the 105th largest in the Republic of Ireland"! JimmyGuano (talk) 14:47, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
If you wish to change Monasterevin go right ahead, I do not make edits on behalf of other people. The addition of the 15th/17th into the opening sentence has been rejected by four editors, and it is that proposal I refer to as a dead horse. Therefore the claim here that there is consensus for the change is wrong. Consensus is not achieved by exhausting the patience of editors to the point they cannot be bothered replying to address the same points. That proposal has not gained consensus, so it is time to move on to something which will gain consensus as you and I seem to be doing. Possibly something about the UK could be added in the "It is the seat of devolved government and legislative Northern Ireland Assembly" sentence? O Fenian (talk) 15:47, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
I only posted the Monasterevin thing because I thought it was funny, it wasn't a serious point.
Thinking about this issue a bit more though, there are added complications with any UK city size comparison. Even on the Birmingham article, for which the notability of the city's UK population ranking is pretty obvious, the ranking issue has been problematic - some editors have claimed that because London strictly-speaking doesn't have the Royal Charter that grants City status in the United Kingdom then the Birmingham article should claim the city to be the largest in the UK, not the second largest. The fact that the ranking issue itself isn't that straightforward is swaying me more towards the "anti" camp. If you were to accept the "island of..." clarification to remove the potentially misleading nature of the Ireland context (which you seem to have done, albeit reluctantly) then I'd be tempted to support that as a decent compromise. I do still think that some sort of indication of Belfast's relative significance in a UK context is worth having though (maybe a ranking on the unambiguous urban area measure?), and the significance of the city being within the UK to so many of its aspects is such that that could still do with making clear in the lead (maybe qualifying "capital of Northern Ireland" with "a part of the United Kingdom located on the island of Ireland")?
JimmyGuano (talk) 22:35, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
I'd hope that "capital of Northern Ireland" alone emphasises its importance in UK terms, without including some quite low figure about city size. Equally going back to your earlier point about the Britishness of the city not being included while the Ireland city comparison is included, I'd hope the "capital of Northern Ireland" does that anyway. The capital part emphasises the British part, and the Ireland part emphasises, well you get the point. Admittedly it does not hammer it home like some might prefer, but I do not see the benefit to the article in trying to force extra information in if it results in poor quality prose. As I said earlier I am quite receptive to some change, providing we get away from the bogged down discussion that other editors insist on having.. O Fenian (talk) 22:40, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Whether or not Belfast is "British" is a POV though; that it is part of the UK isn't, and is of just as much importance to people who think it's a bad thing as it is to those who think it a good thing. I'm not suggesting we should hammer home the first in a fit of unionist triumphalism, just that we do need to make the second explicit because without understanding this fact you can't begin to understand the city. At the moment readers who are new to the subject don't get this spelt out unless they click on the Northern Ireland link, which is making it far too hidden for such a crucial piece of information IMO. Could we not solve this problem and the "relative significance in the UK context" issue by including "the smallest of the four countries of the United Kingdom" as a qualifier to "Northern Ireland" in the opening sentence? I'm not advocating poor quality prose, obviously, but if we agree on the information to be conveyed we then working out how to make it read well becomes a much more soluable task. JimmyGuano (talk) 23:09, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Sorry going to be a bit busy for the rest of the day, will try and get round to this later on today or first thing tomorrow. O Fenian (talk) 09:41, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
It would seem to spoil the flow of the sentence a lot shoving all that in there. Could something about the UK not be added elsewhere? O Fenian (talk) 21:02, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
From my count there are 4 active Users for the change and 1 user account against. Not my fault if your running buddies do not support you anymore. The fact that Belfast is mentioned on the List of largest United Kingdom settlements by population WP would suggest that it is notable.Afterlife10 (talk) 16:08, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Would you like to answer my question about the statistics.gov source (link http://www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/theme_compendia/fom2005/03_FOPM_UrbanAreas.pdf)? You have read it after all, so you claim.. Could you also name the "4 active Users"? O Fenian (talk) 16:12, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks O_fenian, my mistake. its actually more note worthy as it is 11th.Afterlife10 (talk) 16:20, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
To clarify, you believe that the source says Belfast is the 11th largest city in the UK? O Fenian (talk) 16:22, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Also funny that you wont acknowledge this post - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:O_Fenian&action=historysubmit&diff=406890217&oldid=406889848 - By my reckoning, that would suggest that you value a fact that is '20th' in regards to Ireland but if it is a british fact, it is not worth noting. It is clear what you agenda is.Afterlife10 (talk) 16:17, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Would you like to answer my question about the statistics.gov source (link http://www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/theme_compendia/fom2005/03_FOPM_UrbanAreas.pdf)? You have read it after all, so you claim.. Could you also name the "4 active Users"? O Fenian (talk) 16:20, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Just use your fingers and count...Can you answer the question on your talk page first?Afterlife10 (talk) 16:33, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
If you wish to claim there are "4 active Users", I suggest you name them. O Fenian (talk) 16:35, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
taking things in chronological order, can you answer the question I posted on your user page first?Afterlife10 (talk) 16:42, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
We are talking about this article, this is what the talk page of this article is for. Please name the "4 active Users". O Fenian (talk) 16:44, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
I'm just trying to ascertain why you think that the content on the Ireland page where it lists the island as the '20th largest' is notable but when it comes to Belfast being the 11th largest city in the UK, is not.Afterlife10 (talk) 16:49, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Do you have a source that says Belfast is "the 11th largest city in the UK"? I am still waiting for those "4 active Users" also? O Fenian (talk) 16:52, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Who are the 4 active editors-in-question? GoodDay (talk) 16:56, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Keys767, IP and JimmyGuano all seem to be for the motion. Would you be happy with 11th largest Urban area in the UK?Afterlife10 (talk) 17:04, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Can't decide. Thus my scratch-out & deletion. GoodDay (talk) 17:11, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Aha, so "Keys767, IP and JimmyGuano" are three of the people mentioned in this sentence - "From my count there are 4 active Users for the change and 1 user account against". Given that Keys767 made his/her only post before any of the accounts you have chosen to disregard as they have apparently "left the discussion", it would seem only fair to include all of them as well. I am still waiting for a source that says Belfast is "the 11th largest city in the UK"? And to answer your question, no I would not be happy because this article is about Belfast not the "Belfast Urban Area, Castlereagh Urban Area, Greenisland Urban Area, Holywood Urban Area, Lisburn Urban Area, Newtownabbey Urban Area and Milltown" which is what the report ranks #11. O Fenian (talk) 17:22, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Well I thought to include them given that you have included the 3 other opposing user accounts. Ok ill take a looksie for another source. In the meantime, since I have answered your question, Can you answer mine....http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:O_Fenian&action=historysubmit&diff=406890217&oldid=406889848 - By my reckoning, that would suggest that you value a fact that is '20th' in regards to Ireland but if it is a british fact, it is not worth noting. Is there any truth in this?Afterlife10 (talk) 17:37, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────No backtracking now please. Your exact words were "From my count there are 4 active Users for the change and 1 user account against. Not my fault if your running buddies do not support you anymore." Now you have actually named the "4 active Users for the change" it is clear that there is one account in there that made their only contribution to the debate before any of the posts made by people that you have deliberately tried to exclude who are against the proposal. O Fenian (talk) 17:41, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

I think that means we are as guilty as each other given that you sought to ignore their opinions. Ok stop backtracking...answering my question from my previous post. Afterlife10 (talk) 17:47, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Any chance of you answering my question?

Here is a source - http://www.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk/customs/questions/population/cities.htmc - Belfast is the 14th largest city in the UK. Afterlife10 (talk) 21:15, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Another source that is simply a table of cities? I notice nobody has been able to provide a source that gives the trivia item when talking about Belfast in general terms yet. O Fenian (talk) 21:16, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Well the table backs up the suggested content. Are you telling me that the content of an article is made solely of quotations, every single word? You still havent answered my question? it is clear to all that this is a pov push on your part.Afterlife10 (talk) 21:22, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Which content? The 11th biggest? 12th? 14th? 15th? 17th? Why not just throw a dart at a dartboard and pick whatever number it lands on? O Fenian (talk) 21:25, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Ya know folks, I'm maybe completely wrong here, but my SPI senses are tingling again -in TMC direction-. GoodDay (talk) 17:02, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

What's a TMC? JimmyGuano (talk) 22:38, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
I would definitely support a SPI. And a check-user on all the unregistered BT hosted IP's as well as on certain editors who are voting on a number of Ireland related topics. The time and effort being wasted on these topics is unbelievable! --NorthernCounties (talk) 17:48, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Agreed.Afterlife10 (talk) 18:13, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

"on the Island of" not required due to lack of any confusion

The first sentence in the lead reading "is the capital of and the largest city in Northern Ireland and the second largest city in Ireland" does not in any way need the addition of "on the Island of" (sic) due to supposed confusion. As it says mere words before it is the capital of Northern Ireland, how could anyone possibly think it is actually in the other state on the island? O Fenian (talk) 22:12, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Well if you click on the Ireland link. sure enough it is the page for the island, but in the infobox it says Country - Ireland. Which then leads to a page for Republic of Ireland. Now that is confusing! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.184.83.156 (talk) 22:26, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

That has nothing to do with this article. O Fenian (talk) 22:28, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
It is confusing. Maybe it is more to do with the writing style of wikipedia but for the country and Island to carry the same name is confusing. Thats why I thought it best to include it. It takes nothing away from the article but does add clarity. Or we could remove the pipe? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.184.83.156 (talk) 22:32, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
There is no pipe. "Island of Ireland" (sic) is only used when there is actually a need to differentiate, for example when the state is being referred to at the same time. Which does not happen here.. Please stop edit warring and seek consensus for disputed changes. O Fenian (talk) 09:13, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
O Fenian's revert is in-line with the manual of style. Bjmullan (talk) 09:58, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Well it depends on how you interpret the IMOS. I would probably agree with the IP on this but it is more to do with the manual of style. It is very confusing to have both the country and the Island to have the same name. Especially as I have met people who did not know that Ireland (the island) is made up of 2 countries. I would imagine there was probably the same problem with the South Africa WP. But I guess this will probably be argued to the bit when the review of manual of style comes up. I would say though that in reference to O fenian's 1st point: Albany is the Capital of New York, which in turn is in America. So don't be surprised if someone out there actually thought that Belfast was the capital of the Northern Region of the Island.
Something quite funny though is that from what I gather if O fenian got his way in demoting Northern Ireland from a Country to a region or what ever, 'Island of' would probably have to be included.Afterlife10 (talk) 21:32, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
It is not confusing when the country called Ireland is not even being referred to. O Fenian (talk) 21:41, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Problem solved. In is for political units, while On is for geographic units. Thus I've changed it to "....on Ireland". GoodDay (talk) 21:54, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
It is not in English. I suggest reading the sources I have mentioned in the section above, none of those make the mistake of saying "on Ireland". For example "largest city on Ireland" returns 12 unique hits, "largest city in Ireland" returns 448 unique hits. O Fenian (talk) 21:59, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
But on Ireland is less confusing for readers. GoodDay (talk) 22:08, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
We do not use incorrect English to appease the readers. After looking over the 12 unique hits also, the majority are actually constructions such as "largest city on Ireland's south coast". Google Books does not have a single result for "largest city on Ireland", because it is wholly incorrect. O Fenian (talk) 22:09, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
"On the island of Ireland" is the least confusing. To not believe the second mention of "Ireland" in "the capital of and the largest city in Northern Ireland and the second largest city in Ireland" refers to the island rather than the country requires a certain prior knowledge of the geography of the region. Otherwise, it's quite possible for the unfamiliar reader to believe Northern Ireland is a county of the republic of Ireland. --Ħ MIESIANIACAL 22:13, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Mies' proposal is a perfect solution. GoodDay (talk) 23:25, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
I would agree.Afterlife10 (talk) 23:27, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Solution to what? There is no confusion! Does anyone here want to admit they believe that Belfast is part of the state called Ireland? Have any readers ever been confused? This is completely invented confusion, that no competent editor could possibly agree is confusing. O Fenian (talk) 23:29, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Please don't assume all readers know what you know. --Ħ MIESIANIACAL 23:33, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
It's not confusing to you, 'cuz you're familiar with the topic. However, we can't assume that all readers are just as familiar. "...on the island of Ireland" is a reasonable proposal. GoodDay (talk) 23:32, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
It's not my suggestion, but that of the anon User:86.184.83.156 from 17:34, 2 January 2011. Though, the word "island" should not be capitalised and a "the" can be dropped so that the sentence reads: Belfast is the capital of and largest city in Northern Ireland and the second largest city on the island of Ireland. --Ħ MIESIANIACAL 23:32, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
The proposal seems quite reasonable. GoodDay (talk) 23:36, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Again, I would agree with that. Afterlife10 (talk) 23:39, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes, it is hardly surprising you agree with your own proposal.. O Fenian (talk) 23:42, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
I suggest you take this to the guideline talk page, since when that was written it was clear enough to everyone that it is only when the state of Ireland is being referred to that the island needs to be qualified, not when Northern Ireland is being referred to. This would be a radical departure from the guideline. O Fenian (talk) 23:36, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Why? WP:IRE-IRL says quite clearly: "Concerns have been expressed that using the word Ireland alone can mislead given that it refers to both the island of Ireland and the Irish state... use of [[Republic of Ireland|Ireland]], except where the island of Ireland or Northern Ireland is being discussed in the same context or where confusion may arise." Well, here both the island or Ireland and Northern Ireland are being discussed in the same context and readers can indeed be misled by the opening sentence's present lack of distinction between the island of Ireland and the Irish state. --Ħ MIESIANIACAL 23:47, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
You are misquoting the guideline. "In other places prefer use of Ireland, except where the island of Ireland or Northern Ireland is being discussed in the same context" is not referring to the use of "island of Ireland", but over the piped linking of the state. The part that deals with the use of "island of Ireland" reads "An exception is where the state forms a major component of the topic (e.g. on articles relating states, politics or governance) where Ireland should be preferred and the island should be referred to the island of Ireland". I have started a new discussion at the appropriate place anyway. O Fenian (talk) 23:50, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
I didn't misquote anything; the words were copied and pasted. But, now that I look at the section again, it's horribly worded if one is looking for explicit instructions on what to do in any scenario that could possibly arise. I was merely extrapolating a kind of spirit from the law rather than an unquestionable instruction, which is what you appear to want. --Ħ MIESIANIACAL 00:16, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Flexiability is needed here. Not everyone automatically can distinguish which Ireland is being mentioned. GoodDay (talk) 22:15, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
The use of Ireland is confusing O Fenian for many people. You and others may know the difference but not everybody does. Stating "in the island of" is hardly unfactual or incorrect, and adds clarification. Mabuska (talk) 00:50, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
"...on the island of...", would read even better. GoodDay (talk) 00:52, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
I agree with Mabuska. It might be more beneficial to readers unfamiliar with the history of Ireland to have the sentence read in the island of Ireland just to avoid possible confusion.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 08:00, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
The current format adds more clarity.well done.Afterlife10 (talk) 23:36, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
It does read good, and i have to admit MIESIANIACAL makes a point point that it is better grammer "cities on the island" rather than "cities in the island". Mabuska (talk) 23:45, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
I concur. In the island of Ireland looked slightly bizarre when I wrote it out.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 07:33, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

We've only got one editor opposed to the change, so apparently there's a consensus for 'on the island of Ireland'. GoodDay (talk) 21:28, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

I count more than one, and this discussion is redundant to the discussion at the guideline talk page that I started. The edit is a significant deviation from the guideline. O Fenian (talk) 10:40, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
O'Fenian, I have to concur that on the island of Ireland is more helpful to readers than the possibly confusing in Ireland. Prior to partition, this would be have been fine, but seeing as legally the city of Belfast is in the UK, on the island of Ireland is factually more accurate.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 11:12, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
How is it "more accurate"? It is saying the same thing in a needlessly verbose way? O Fenian (talk) 11:15, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
I think it is funny that O_Fenian has made 61 edits to the Derry WP yet he never thought to change this - Derry or Londonderry is the second-biggest city in Northern Ireland[2][3] and the fourth-biggest city on the island of Ireland.[4]....(smirk)Afterlife10 (talk) 21:58, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
It's not needlessly verbose. That Belfast is in Ireland but not in Ireland has a fairly obvious potential to confuse people new to the subject. Clarifying this situation is crucial to the success of the entire article, surely? JimmyGuano (talk) 11:35, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Exactly. How is clarification needlessly verbose?--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 17:34, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
"On the island of Ireland" can't deviate from the guideline because the guideline doesn't speak of this specific circumstance. The guideline does, however, touch on the fact that it can be hard to distinguish between Ireland and Ireland if the sentence doesn't elaborate on one or the other. --Ħ MIESIANIACAL 05:32, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
The IMOS iirc is only about when to use "Republic of". That is not an issue here. So i dont see a policy problem with this. Mabuska (talk) 17:25, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Just to clarify for O Fenian who claims he didn't drop his opposition. There has been no more comments from him on this issue since the 9th of January, well over a month ago. Long enough to consider it opposition dropped, especially since there appears to be quite a clear general consensus. Mabuska (talk) 23:59, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

I agree with O Fenian's point. The article Ireland already links the user to an article about the island, so "the island of" is unnecessary. If you were referring to the Southern state, you would include "Republic of Ireland". Overall, Ireland is an island, which includes Northern Ireland (part of the UK) and the Republic of Ireland (a country of its own). There's no confusion with that statement. BigMattyO 00:17, 21 February 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BigMattyO (talkcontribs)

We don't mention the Republic of Ireland however. There is no policy problem with it and most seem content with keeping it in. However good to see you finally coming to a discussion on it rather than continually removing it without discussion. Mabuska (talk) 17:43, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Climate data

Questioning why, exactly, the climate data includes, and starts with, 'record high' temperatures!? It is very strange. This row on the climate data tables is by far the most conspicuous, highlighted in a eye-attracting yellow-orange colour, compared to the darker, harder to focus upon standard climate information. One wonders why so much space (and highlighting) is given to one day ever, whenever, of temperatures, by month. Nothing at all to do with the modern zeal of Belfast to promote itself as attractive to potential visitors, could it be? Personally, when examining climates for places to visit, and usually for any other kind of information purpose, I've rarely seen this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.14.85.194 (talk) 18:28, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Ulster Scots name

Why has the Scots name of the city been removed from the infobox? Surely as a recognised regional language (the same as Irish), the Ulster Scots name should be included alongside the Irish? Jonchapple (talk) 21:55, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

If its sourced it should definately be in it. Mabuska (talk) 23:40, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
I agree. You can't give unfair weight to one language. ★KEYS★ (talk) 00:13, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Added, with a couple of refs. Jonchapple (talk) 06:29, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Good job. The Gaelic name should also be sourced for verifiability. Mabuska (talk) 11:09, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

I'v found four North/South Ministerial Council reports, written in some form of Ulster Scots, that use "Belfast" repeatedly:

It seems they still havn't agreed on an orthografy. ~Asarlaí 01:49, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

That seems to be true for a lot of Ulster Scots words. Case in point: the alternative spellings you've added to St Andrews Agreement, Northern Ireland Assembly, etc! JonChappleTalk 06:30, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
I'v added "Belfast" to the infobox as a Scots spelling (alongside "Bilfawst"). ~Asarlaí 16:59, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

The infobox is looking overcrowded. Ther ar three Scots names and seven references. All of the names should stay, but could we shift the references elsewher? I'd like to put them in a footnote of the infobox (like this) but Template:Infobox UK place doesn't let us do that. ~Asarlaí 15:40, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

I tried putting the references in a normal footnote but it didn't work. Maybe we should ask for a footnote parameter (like this) to be added to Infobox UK Place. ~Asarlaí 15:59, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

I removed one of the references for Bilfawst (it had 3 while the others had 1 or 2). It looks less overcrowded now but I think it would look much better if all the references (for Scots and Irish) wer elsewher. ~Asarlaí 16:16, 20 October 2011 (UTC)