Talk:Ireland

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Good article Ireland has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
April 15, 2006 Good article nominee Listed
October 13, 2008 Good article reassessment Delisted
October 30, 2008 Good article reassessment Not listed
April 7, 2010 Good article nominee Listed
Current status: Good article


Should Lisburn not be listed among the 10 most populous areas?[edit]

The official population of Lisburn is 71,000 according to it's own wiki page with link to city council pdf. Although this falls within the Belfast metro area, it is not part of the Belfast urban area statistic. Captainbeecher (talk) 10:00, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

IPA pronunciation[edit]

The pronunciation /ˈaɪərlənd/ is, what Americans say. The majority of people say including the Irish say /ˈaɪrlənd/.

Semi-protected edit request on 22 November 2017[edit]

Change "Ireland is the second-largest island of the British Isles, the third-largest in Europe, and the twentieth-largest on Earth" to "Ireland is the third-largest island in Europe, and the twentieth-largest on Earth" Cgr2000ie (talk) 20:58, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Not done Consensus needed for changes of this nature. Discuss, get consensus, and request again. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:03, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

"British Isles" RfC[edit]

There seems to be consensus against the change. Those opposing felt that the current statement was accurate, generally acceptable, and not excessively long, while some also felt changing the wording dropped content in a way that would seem politically/geographically lacking. I'd guess the closest policy on that would be a sort of inverse-undue weight; dropping parts of the current text might reflect a lack of weight for an appropriate descriptor. Arguments in support favored brevity or felt that including the current wording presented its own WP:NPOV issue. --slakrtalk / 02:46, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Should the current text "Ireland is the second-largest island of the British Isles, the third-largest in Europe, and the twentieth-largest on Earth" be trimmed to "Ireland is the third-largest island in Europe, and the twentieth-largest on Earth"? 22:17, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

  • Support, since the additional stat is superfluous, and tends to offend the average Irish person. Ireland isn't generally judged specifically in comparison to the UK as part of something. While that set of islands has the unfortunate name "British Isles" in most sources, it's not particularly meaningful. By way of comparison, the article on Portugal doesn't say it's the second-largest country in Iberia, and there's not even a socio-political reason not to; it's just trivia.  — SMcCandlish ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ʌ<  07:19, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support - unnecessary, per SMcCandlish. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:34, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose Comparing to Iberia is inherently wrong. The term is widely used when refering to the group of islands and has been so for centuries and has no bearing on geopolitical entities or whoever rules them. Ireland is the second largest island in the British Isles, fact, and that term originates from the ancient world. Clearly politically motivated request. Mabuska (talk) 09:41, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Comparison to the island of Britain is common and has been for a long time. And contrary to the frequently quoted claim, we Irish do not get upset by the term ‘British Isles’. It’s the correct geographical name.--Dmol (talk) 21:38, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support per SMcCandlish. Ceoil (talk) 21:40, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
    Comment, is it not against Wikipedia policy or guidelines simply stating per someone else rather than providing your own arguments? Pretty sure it is enshrined or mentioned somewhere, and even if that is not the case it would be nice to have actual arguments given for the sake of consensus building etc. As it is this is simply a straw poll that shows no consensus or efforts to build one. Mabuska (talk) 22:27, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
    Nonsense, it is common practice and there is no requirement to repeat or create something new if it has already been said. It is slightly intimidatory to make such a comment as well so you might like to strike it (and this response if you do) ----Snowded TALK 07:14, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
    Actually I won't strike it as I have seen it stated though for the life of me I can't find where it was at. If it can be found and it turns out to simply be an essay and not policy then aye I'd strike it but not until then. Mabuska (talk) 12:21, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
    Oh very well if your going to be so tiresome. There are different relativities or contexts that can be mentioned; the British Isles or the continent, as SMcCandlish argued, and seems to have been lost here. Ceoil (talk) 01:21, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
    You can't find it because it never existed and you shouldn't make claims for policy if you can't back them up ----Snowded TALK 07:53, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
    Comment I believe it used to be part of the Not Vote or AfD guidance pages as advice regarding if you don't have anything new to add to the conversation then you don't need to post as the outcome isn't a vote. However it was never a policy, just a suggestion adn an attempt at not clogging up AfDs and similar with pointless noise. Canterbury Tail talk 20:46, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support Even without the British Isles, the statement is true. The present statement is overly long. The Banner talk 22:59, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
    • It would be sufficient to shorten it to "Ireland is the third-largest island in Europe". The Banner talk 14:06, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose - the rfc did not show all the wiki links there, which is the value of showing each relationship. The UK relationship being the most immediate and prominent, would be improper to not lead with. I could see putting the whole line lower in the article as geography/relationship judged secondary, but would not cut out any of the wiki links. Markbassett (talk) 06:20, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
    The article is about the island, not about political units such as the UK. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:13, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
    Ghmyrtle - on the contrary, the article is significantly UK or British: Northern Ireland is UK, with additional article content about the period of Union, links to British Energy and economic ties, Royal Charter of the major cities, the primary and one of the official languages being English, shared cultural history and even the origins of Guiness. Cheers Markbassett (talk) 20:19, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose The article is a geographical one and BI is one of the most common terms. ----Snowded TALK 06:41, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose Even if the sentence were too long, which it is not, this could be remedied simply by rearranging the punctuation. Other than catering for those with political motives, there is no reason for removing the term 'British Isles'. If the sentence does need shortening, there is probably less merit in keeping term 'third-largest in Europe'. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 08:50, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose It is factual and not overly long. Why would you remove a perfectly salient fact. Lets keep the politics in a box, out of the way. It has been part of the British Isles, relatively speaking, since time began. It is a geo article after all. scope_creep (talk) 11:12, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose Seems to be a political motive behind the proposal. Nothing wrong with status quo. Mooretwin (talk) 11:18, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose I think it gives good context for readers rather than having Ireland floating somewhere in the middle of nowhere around Europe. Dmcq (talk) 11:41, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment Actually, i think that the first two factoids are unnecessary, but if any one were to be removed for reasons of clarity or brevity, rather than political or personal distaste motives, probably the European one should go, leaving the more relevant ("British Isles") and more complete ("on Earth") comparisons. I am not formally opposing, however, as i am primarily of British descent, and don't wish my (potential, not actual, i believe) political POV to influence the discussion. Happy days, LindsayHello 12:03, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment if anything is stating 20th largest in the world less important than 3rd largest in Europe? Mabuska (talk) 12:24, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
    Agree, who cares whether it is the tenth, twentieth or the fiftieth smallest? I'm not even sure what is counted as an island in world terms. Dmcq (talk) 12:57, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
    I agree wholeheartedly with this. Ceoil (talk) 10:07, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose as Ireland is the second largest island in the British Isles. GoodDay (talk) 13:51, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Snowded and others. These are geographical articles, using geographical terms. People have a right to be offended; they don't have a right to not be offended. And I find it curious that the call for an RfC is made by someone's first ever edit? Clearly originating from a politically-motivated sock. Now - what nationalist socks have recently been blocked... BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 14:36, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
    It was an IP making a semi-protected edit request. SMcCandlish changed it to a RFC. Ceoil (talk) 03:01, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
    Ah, ok. Bit of an over-reaction to an IP's request, though, IMO. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 08:52, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
    Huh what? It was a rather polite suggestion made on the talk page, then people started voting. Ceoil (talk) 10:00, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
    But then again, this is all rather a trivial, and I don't really care either way. Ceoil (talk) 10:44, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
    What I meant was I think it's an over-reaction to open a full RfC based off an edit-request that's apparently someone's first ever edit. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 17:54, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
    I had no idea how many edits had been made by the requester. I just noticed that the edit request was denied for lack of discussion, so I opened said discussion as a procedural matter. I recalled something like this having been raised before, and people being sore about it periodically, so it seemed worth re-assessing what the consensus actually might be and whether it's a strong one, which appears to be the case.  :-)  — SMcCandlish ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ʌ<  17:15, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Support Ireland is not West Britain.Etruscanman114 (talk) 17:03, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
    Nowhere does it mention West Britain. ww2censor (talk) 17:46, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
    Striking !vote of blocked sock. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 17:59, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose the current prose seems to strike a reasonable balance. ww2censor (talk) 17:46, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose current description shows a reasonable balance between various points of view. Brough87 (talk) 00:33, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose Common usage does place Ireland in the context of the British Isles. Additionally, in reality it is the second largest of these islands. Please keep this information in the current statement.Horst59 (talk) 19:17, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose The British Isles is the most significant grouping here - as it is a significant part of the archipelago. If at all we should strike Europe (and to a lesser degree the world) - Ireland's ranking as 3rd in Europe (and not 2nd) is due to Iceland whose inclusion in Europe, while customary (but not universal), is not a clear-cut thing - geologically it is not part of the continent.Icewhiz (talk) 07:36, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
    Are you sure? Considering it straddles the European and Northern Amercian plates says that it is part in Europe geologicially. Mabuska (talk) 09:50, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
    You are refuting yourself in saying that "it straddles the European and Northern Amercian plates" - it is part of both. For cultural reasons, as well as distance from the main landmass (but not however from Greenland which generally seen as part of NA) - it is generally considered part of Europe - but this isn't a "100% thing".Icewhiz (talk) 10:57, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
    Maybe my style of English is different from yours but when we say straddle over here it generally means both so I'm not refuting myself. You are considering you said it was not part of the continent but now you are saying part of it is. Regardless it is highly off-topic. Indeed the RfC should be closed seeing their is clearly no consensus for change. Mabuska (talk) 10:41, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
    I will show due respect and abjectly bow down to those who can trace their lineage way before the the Fir Bolg to when the Highland Boundary Fault formed. ;-) Dmcq (talk) 12:42, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
    Indeed - can we get a snow close? BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 14:25, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose. It's common, and helpful to readers to mention this type of information in articles about islands in island chains. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 05:41, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Support I agree that it's long and care should be taken regarding placing Ireland within the British Isles, as its geographically accurate, but could present POV problems given the history between nations on the two islands. South Nashua (talk) 16:09, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose - The length is somewhat long but we shouldn't remove factually correct content - I don't really see a valid reason to remove. –Davey2010Talk 19:10, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose - (Summoned by bot) A logical factual progression: country, continent, world. Not strictly a policy basis for my !vote, but I also suspect a political motive in the elision. DonFB (talk) 04:48, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment part of "British Isles", is not the most easily understood or clearest description of where Ireland is. Would not a clearer description be 'located to the west of mainland GB'. To describe it simply as the Xth largest European island seems too vague. The use of an unqualified "British Isles" to include Ireland is now somewhat anachronistic even in GB. We should be using the most universally, and easily, understood description, and - even though the article is about the island, rather than the country - it is needlessly confusing to imply that it is "British". Pincrete (talk) 16:03, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Support Having foolisly not looked at the article before leaving my comment, I see that the article already describes Ireland's position relative to EngScWales. Because of the ambiguous nature of "British Isles" as a geographic and political term, the inclusion is unnec and would be likely to be confusing to the level of reader needing this basic info as to where/what Ireland is. Pincrete (talk) 16:19, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose The information seems informative and useful. Darkfrog24 (talk) 01:48, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Comparison for context Canadians are not Americans but nobody would argue that Canada is a part of the geographical land mass known as North America. It in itself was America long before the United States adopted American as it denonym. Likewise the Irish are not British but Ireland is a part of the geographical land mass known as the British Isles. Again the term British predates the United Kingdom adopting British as it's denonym. Great Britain is not so called because the British think they are fantastic. It's so called because it is the largest of the British isles. Those who are offended by this should direct their ire at the Greeks and Romans as they named the islands long before the concept long before the United Kingdom existed. Captainbeecher (talk) 10:19, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
  • SMcCandlish, time to close this RfC? ;-) BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 14:35, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
    Or it can just archive naturally; it's clearly a WP:SNOWBALL, so no formal closure is needed.  — SMcCandlish ¢ 😼  17:56, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
  • invalid Comparison . You cannot compare an archipelago located in the continent of Europe to a Continent of the americas theres really no comparison in anyway at all, landmass is described by most definitions as a continent or other large body of land not broken up by ocean or sea ,so the Irish and british isles cannot be a landmass , just because a term predates something doesnt mean the term is the same as it was originally used if that was the case we should call the irish Scots and ireland Scotland or scotia terms change often in a few generations can mean something completely different let alone millennias ,who decides Ireland is part of the british isles shouldnt the inhabitants get a say in what terms are used for their island to suggest otherwise is Orwellian. The vast majority of the population find the term offensive despite what the oppose commenter said .To suggest that forginers get to decide what ireland is called over the local population is down right ridiculous btw especially when the term is clearly rooted in British imperialism and is offensive .the term British isles only dates back to the 15th century it was created by british writers as political propaganda upon the discovery of old greek and roman documents in which both these islands were called the pretanic isles ,however later the islands were called Ériu for Ireland, and "Albion" for present-day Great Britain these native names were probably the actual names for Ireland and Britain with the former being generic names by the greeks who didnt have any meaningful contact with the inhabitants yet, the term used by the greeks was never in common usage it only existed in their writings and was out of use for over a thousand years and never used by the irish , not a single document from the medieval period uses the term , no im afraid the term british isles was created by british imperialistic writers for political purposes and survives today partly as a revanchist term not simply a geographical one, regardless of its debatable supposed historical origins.most of the opposed sides comments are utterly ridiculous ,stuff about Guinness?. l haven't bothered to waded through them ,but the point is having the term British isles on the page is offensive clutters the page up from more important specifics and doesn't add anything of worth . so its clear that it shouldn't be added back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.107.8.114 (talk) 01:50, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
    • Despite your late alteration of your text, the vast majority just does not care about it. With the exception of staunch Republicans, I have never met anybody who was offended by the term. The Banner talk 07:00, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
  • SMcCandlish the snow isn't melting! :P BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 07:37, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
    Yeah, I have no idea why this has not been closed yet. The consensus is clear.  — SMcCandlish ¢ 😼  01:19, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
    Closure requested at WP:AN. The Banner talk 15:26, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ireland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required on behalf of editors regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification, as with any edit, using the archive tools per instructions below. This message updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 1 May 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:13, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 March 2018[edit]

Some of the historical visitors and early visitors were Phoenicians and Spaniards. https://archive.org/stream/rervmanglicarvms00will#page/n351/mode/2up William, of Malmesbury; Henry, of Huntingdon; Roger, of Hoveden; Ethelwerd, d 998?; Ingulf, 1030?-1109; Savile, Henry; Bishop, George; Newbery, Ralph; Barker, Robert (1596). Rervm anglicarvm scriptores post Bedam praecipvi. Harold B. Lee Library. Londoni : excudebant G. Bishop, R. Nyberie, & R. Barker. p. 172.

an there are my other authors like stabo etc... saying pretty much William malmesbury (talk) 18:56, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: edit requests must include complete and specific descriptions of the request, that is, specify a verbatim copy of the text that should be placed in the article. Please change X is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form Please change X to Y Spintendo      20:21, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
It already talks about people coming from Iberia. There is no evidence of any Phoenecian influence in DNA or culture. The Phoenecians seem to have confined themselves to the Mediterranean and not gone out into the Atlantic. They didn't even seem to go to the north of the Mediterranean much. Dmcq (talk) 10:52, 8 May 2018 (UTC)