Talk:Parliament Buildings (Northern Ireland)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Untitled[edit]

There are a few things I would like to add, but I am not in the position at the minute to access the information in book form in order to check the facts.

I went on a guided tour a few years ago and they said that the official title was still "Parliament Buildings" due to the plans for multiple buildings. They are certainly called that on the NI Assembly website and the postal address is Parliament Buildings.

Aditionally, there were also plans for a third judicial building, but it was built in Belfast instead (High Court) as a compromise with the Imperial government in London who were supposed to be "jealous" of the grandeur of the site in Belfast, and worried about the cost. Apparently the admin building and the judicial building would have sat at either side of the current building, which was to have two less floors. These were added to provide the office space the admin building would have had if it had been built.

Does this ring true? I would check but can't! Garethhamilton 21:09, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Sounds believable. The original building was meant to have a dome also, but the funding had to be cut because of the Wall Street Crash. That may well while the other buildings had the plug pulled. I've visited Stormont a few times and it is a magnificent building and grounds. I remember standing at the dispatch box in the old House of Commons (before the chamber burnt down, obviously!) and the acoustics in the chamber was superb. At the time I was under pressure to run for the Dáil. A politician who was with me came up to me and said "does it not give you a buzz?" I snapped back. "I'm still not running". "Ah go on." "No. No. No". They finally got the mesage! The last thing I'd want was a 100 hour a week job with little job security!FearÉIREANNMap of Ireland's capitals.png\(caint) 22:08, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Renaming?[edit]

If the official title is in the plural, i.e. Parliament Buildings, should it not be changed/moved? What does anyone else think? Garethhamilton 17:41, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

merger proposal[edit]

See Talk:Stormont Castle for explanation.--Joe 1987 00:35, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Merger[edit]

hmm, personally I don't see why the castle shouldn't be part of this article, provided that searches for Stormont Castle would link to this page, other than some 404, or something to that effect.

Dom0803 17:13, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

A non-runner. It would be like merging 10 Downing Street and the Houses of Parliament, or The West Wing and Capitol Hill. They are separate buildings, with separate uses, one executive, one executive cum legislative. Why on earth would we want to merge them, and then have one or other in an article about somewhere else entirely? FearÉIREANNMap of Ireland's capitals.png\(caint) 18:16, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I see your point.. I think maybe if there was an article, Stormont Government Territory, or something to that effect, then perhaps all the government things within the government territory at stormont (this one, the castle, SSA, dundonald house, etc) Not proposing the idea, but it would make sense. I guess it takes away from individual detail, though.

Dom0803 19:48, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

In my opinion, there is no need for the merger, or for a composite "everything found on the Stormont Estate" article. Can the merge template be removed? Garethhamilton 12:33, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Done. FearÉIREANNMap of Ireland's capitals.png\(caint) 14:46, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Gallery?[edit]

I have a lot of main article irrelevent photos of Stormont, is it permittable to create a page like Parliament Buildings (Northern Ireland) gallery or something which is just an image gallery? It would then be linked to from the main page. --Dom0803 02:29, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Nevermind, discovered Wikimedia Commons - Stormont @ Wikimedia Commons --Dom0803 20:06, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Article reorganisation[edit]

I reorganised the article into a history section, and a chambers section, and a regulations section, with appropriate subsections - i think it looks a little better. If there are any suggestions about how this organisation could be improved, or if you think i've made things worse, go ahead and change it. ConDemTalk 00:33, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

bnja fjsfgj —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.219.94.173 (talk) 10:53, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:StormontChamber.JPG[edit]

The image Image:StormontChamber.JPG is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --23:54, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Parliament Buildings (Northern 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) 22:28, 29 November 2017 (UTC)