Template talk:Irish states since 1171

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Video Template talk:Irish states since 1171

Derry Gratis

Should not Derry Free be added to the "See also" list at the bottom of the template in this article? the Irish Confederation | Connaught Republic | ÃÆ' ireire | Northern Ireland | Republic of Munster

Derry is a free de facto free country like the Republic of Connacht, etc. It lasts about a year, so maybe it should be added? Republican of Wexford too?

Any thoughts? Derry Boi 16:12, September 11, 2006 (UTC)

This will have as much validity as RoC and RoM. - sony-youth ^talk 22:29, February 26, 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but it does not make sense to state that Londonderry is an independent state for any length of time. Henry Parrteson's book states that "on August 15th, 'Free Derry' has been effectively handed over from the Northern states." Watch the word effective. What is' Free Derry border? How is the system of government? What is the head of state? Traditional unions 12:41, July 3, 2007 (UTC)

It is VERY unreasonable to say that 'Free Derry' is a state. Nistitional unionist 09:58, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

That's not a bad way to describe it, I'll think about it over the next few days. International Unionists 22:56, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Maps Template talk:Irish states since 1171

Northern Ireland

A few questions about the latest changes to Northern Ireland in this template:

• Did Northern Ireland stop being satay in 1972?
  • If so, could it be considered a state from 1972 to attend?
  • Or, have you ever been to UK?
• Should recent changes to Northern Ireland be considered as a new country?
  • If so, what is the 1998 point stating for this situation?

- sony-youth ^bicara 20:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

The Devolved Northern Ireland House of Commons and the Senate's arrangement by the Irish partition in 1920/21 were removed by the British government and the administration went straight back to Westminster, so that was a change in the constitutional status in that regard.-- padraig3uk 20: 51, April 18, 2007 (UTC )

Northern Ireland has had a continuous recognition since the Irish Government Act. AFAIK has never been given a legal title like 'state', but it also means that the legal term for what type of entity is not actually changed - only the method of governance has changed.

I do not understand why the Northern Ireland link should be divided into 2, mainly because one point to NI and the other to the NI House of Commons. This seems inconsistent with others, especially Southern Ireland who are associated with Southern Ireland rather than the Southern Irish Parliament or similar. beano 20:55, April 18, 2007 (UTC)

I edited the first link to the Parliament of Northern Ireland.-- padraig3uk 21:08, April 18, 2007 (UTC)

It still does not change the fact that a) The relationships of Southern Ireland and Northern Ireland are inconsistent and b) Northern Ireland was created in 1921 and runs to this day. A new state was not created, the existing method of governance changed. beano 15:17, April 19, 2007 (UTC)

In 1921, the British Government Regulated both the House of Commons in Southern Ireland and the House of Commons of Northern Ireland, the south met only twice, the first time only 4 or 5 members were present and the second time was a formality for supports the Anglo-Irish Treaty, but only after it is authorized in DÃÆ'¡il ÃÆ'â € ireann first. Northern Ireland HOC existed until 1972 when it was disolved, and the horrible rules were returned to Westminster.-- padraig3uk 15:21, April 19, 2007 (UTC)

If that is the case then no new country was formed in NI after 1972 so the order should be read: "Southern Ireland | Northern Ireland | Irish Free State." No need to date, they do not show up for the others.

Now point 2: is a new country formed in 1998 or is this a recovering suspended situation?

Pardraig, you have once again removed the official flag of Northern Ireland at the time the country was disolved. This is a flag that the former Northern Ireland state chose to use to represent itself. If you do not like this flag in real life, it is your prerogative, but your personal dislike of it has no place here. I'll remind you that this is a template, the changes made here affect many different pages. Try to act responsibly, with consensus, and be truthful to the facts. - sony-youth ^talk 07:58, April 20, 2007 (UTC)

But reject the flag representing Northern Ireland from 1972 onwards, so you must have two entries for NI, do you say that this flag now represents the Northern Ireland Assembly today when the flag can not even be flown from the building- government building.-- padraig3uk 10:12, April 20, 2007 (UTC)

No, Padraig, what I'm saying is that this template is for the country. If NI is not a post-72 country, then the entry for NI post 1972 is not included here. If you are not satisfied with the links pointing to the current Northern Ireland article then why do not you create a special new article about the state of NI during 1921-72, along the same lines as other historical countries in the template. Templates can run something links:

... Republic of Ireland | Southern Ireland | Northern Ireland | Irish Free Country...

Does this sound like a fair compromise? Personally, I think it will also be more informative, but I also want to hear some Unionist perspectives on that before proceeding. - sony-youth ^talk 11:04, April 20, 2007 (UTC)

That would be a good solution, and be more factual than the current setting.-- padraig3uk 11:27, April 20, 2007 (UTC)

A copy of the post requests comments made to the NI talk page:

Out of discussion on the talk page for template "Template: Irish states since 1171" template, a proposal has been made to create a special article about Northern Ireland as a country during the period 1921 - 72. It can be found in [ [Northern Ireland (state, 1921-72)] or something along the same line. I support it, because it's another editor, but I particularly want to hear some Unionist perspectives on this.

The modified template will run something like this:

... Republic of Ireland | Southern Ireland | Northern Ireland | Irish Free Country...

Specifically, I would like to know, would it be appropriate to add a new entry for Northern Ireland to post-1998, which might link here (without flags, I think, though I would be in favor of using the assembly logo in this particular case.) The reason for this is because the template is specific to "state", which implies some form of self-governance.

- sony-youth ^talk 11:47, April 20, 2007 (UTC)

Ragardless ofgetits, fair use rules will prevent the use of assembly logos in any template! 86.12.249.63 07:02, April 21, 2007 (UTC)

Northern Ireland is constitutionally not much different now in 1922. It's hard to divide it into 2, or have an end date. And what about all the time between 1972 and now when the local government has started and stopped? Jonto 17:33, April 26, 2007 (UTC)

Northern Ireland is not now, nor has it ever been, a country. This is a constituent part of the Kingdom of England, a self-regulating section, but never a country. International unionists 12:43, July 3, 2007 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Derry Free

Is Tricolor the best symbol to represent Derry? I tried, but reduced it to, it looks like Cra is not that great. There are so many tricolors in this template, they seem to lose their uniqueness!

Please sign your comment. But I agree, I realize Free Derry is a republican in outlook/ethos or whatever, but I do not think tricolor is right. It is not annexed by the Republic, it should be autonomous. beano 01:15, April 21, 2007 (UTC)

Star plows can be an alternative.-- padraig3uk 06:18, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Defining an idea along the right lines, however, I would associate the plow with IRSM, though whether this is true 35 years ago is a different mater! 86.12.249.63 07:00, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

The starred row is the Republican Socialist flag instead of IRSM, its use already exists before the date and comes from the ISRP preparation by James Connolly.-- padraig3uk 16:36, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Padraig, nit-picking you with the NI flag and its unofficial status while suggesting a flag for non-states that never really has flags is a significant inconsistency. 81.154.60.248 14:20, 21 April 2007 (UTC).

The Ulster Banner is a sectarian flag used to represent extremist Loyalists, never a North Irish flag as a country.-- padraig3uk 16:36, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

81.154.60.248 is correct. You are proposing a flag for non-states that have never had any description flags. I will not say that it is always wrong, but it is very inconsistent with your view of the Northern Irish flag. beano 11:28, April 26, 2007 (UTC)

src: pre00.deviantart.net

The proposed redesign

I propose to change the template to a design similar to what is below. I do not present this as an "end" design, but would like to hear another editor's opinion about it. - sony-youth ^{plÃÆ' Â © igh} 01:41, April 26, 2007 (UTC)

Oh, just noticed that there was a problem with Firefox/Camino - the Republic of Ireland was shown as happening just after Southern Ireland (although the dates 1916 and 1921 for each still fit in the timeline). This issue only affects Firefox/Camino, but I'll see what the problem is fixing it. - sony-youth ^{plÃÆ' Â © igh} 07:35, April 26, 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and the question for other editors is whether the "squares" for the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland must run parallel to Northern Ireland from 1922 onwards (in connection with the United Kingdom and Ireland.) - sony-youth ^{plÃÆ' Â © igh} 07:39, April 26, 2007 (UTC)

OK, I made a version with English today in it, see here. - sony-youth ^{plÃÆ' Â © igh} 07:57, April 26, 2007 (UTC)

Scratch that, template without UKGBNI see here. Including UKGBNI is factually more correct, I believe. - sony-youth ^{plÃÆ' Â © igh} 08:38, April 26, 2007 (UTC)

User: Sony-youth/sandbox3

I like the idea of ​​SY, but it seems very appropriate and too big to include as a footer on another page. Maybe the timeline can go in alone? beano 11:29, April 26, 2007 (UTC)

I agree that it's maybe a bit too busy to use as a footer, but I think that's good apart from that. It's done well! Dppowell 13:35, April 26, 2007 (UTC)

Not bad. I think the Republic of Ireland 1916-1921 needs to be pushed back slightly to UK 1801 - 1921, as it was before the NI or 'Southern Ireland', and ended at the same point as UK GB & amp; I. (Sarah777 17:22, April 26, 2007 (UTC))

This is a problem with Firefox. I tried to fix it. - sony-youth ^{plÃÆ' Â © igh} 18:27, April 26, 2007 (UTC)

I think that the official name should be used for Ireland, being the Republic of Ireland as it does for all official state languages ​​on Wikipedia. --Cka4004 17:57, April 26, 2007 (UTC)

Except that the official name for the country is Ireland - as internationally recognized and by mutual agreement between the British and Irish governments. - sony-youth ^{plÃÆ' Â © igh} 18:27, April 26, 2007 (UTC)

May I suggest trying a version without a flag? I seem to add more clutter than illumination. "Free Derry" is very problematic and will cause an edit war. - Red King 18:57, April 26, 2007 (UTC)

Incredible graphics, Sony-young! I agree with the above that it's rather big for footers, but I would suggest putting it in Irish countries since 1171 pages in place of templates. That would illustrate the article very well Two related comments: country Northern Ireland has existed continuously from 1921 to the present, even in the years when it has no legislative council, so (a) there should be no gap for the period of direct rule (1972- 1998), and (b) early Nortern Ireland (and Southern Ireland) should be pushed to the right (or the Republic of Ireland pushed to the left). I'm using IE7 so it's not a browser issue.
btw Derry Free is in the current template, so I will leave it.
Scolaire 19:05, April 26, 2007 (UTC)

GOOD. I made the suggested changes. I agree that it is not suitable for footer. So I'll make it a template and throw it into an Irish Country article. - sony-youth ^{plÃÆ' Â © igh} 22:51, April 26, 2007 (UTC)

Better yet Sony! Complex, but also history. Facts can not be lost in pursuit of style; it does not look good. (Sarah777 00:25, 27 April 2007 (UTC))

src: www.jst.ufl.edu

Infobox

Sometimes, the conflict is positive. And here we have an example, we have arrived at something. There is something to be said for a link to an article about the institutions of Northern Ireland deformation 1921-1973 in the see section as well though..... is there an appropriate article? Traditional unionist (talk) 14:05, 11 December 2007 (UTC):

There is a Northern_Ireland_1921-72 link from Northern Ireland's 1922-72 template politics, but is currently directed to the Northern History of Ireland article.-- Padraig (talk) 15:25, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I update the template radically. I used a link to the Northern Ireland Parliament that was already there. I think a proper 1922-72 Northern Ireland article would be better, but I think the original "history" will (or will change to) 1922-2007. - sony-youth ^{plÃÆ' Â © igh} 16:20, December 11, 2007 (UTC)

Irish countries since 1171 Ireland state since 1171

src: media.shpock.com

Edit War

It seems like I might some have to discuss this..... Traditional unionist (talk) 01:11, March 25, 2008 (UTC)

My two euro cents is that the Republic of Ireland is included in the See also section. If the Commonwealth (de facto, de jure and internationally recognized) and Confederate (internationally recognized and supported, de facto and de jure so far) may be happy to rest in this section then Republic of Ireland (not internationally recognized, not de jure, but de facto) can. - sony-youth ^{plÃÆ' Â © igh} 20:43, March 25, 2008 (UTC)

Confederations should also be upgraded. The Commonwealth is not an "Irish State". Sarah777 (talk) 22:00, March 25, 2008 (UTC)

I do not think that any changes are required for the template. Save on December 2007. Snappy56 (talk) 08:59, March 26, 2008 (UTC)

src: www.starlightcafe.org

Correction to template

I have fixed the error here and asked Snappy not to start editing the war. The previous version implied superior status for Ireland as part of Britain 1919-1922 rather than a democratically declared Republic. POV is clear. Sarah777 (talk) 10:35, May 11, 2008 (UTC)

Sarah, it takes two people to make an edit war, and you've been back on this issue since March. There are two POVs here, depending on different views on how to judge both the legitimacy of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence and the practical effects of the Declaration of Independence. The debate involves all sorts of issues such as the level of international recognition for the new republic (and the importance of that recognition), and the extent to which the new republic is a de facto state.

One of the problems with infoboxes is that it's very difficult to use it to accommodate such a complicated and debatable issue, and it does not help at all for anyone involved to simply refer to a "clear error". Please discuss this issue, and try to reach agreement on some mechanisms that allow infoboxes to recognize different interpretations of this historical period? - Brown HairedGirl (talk) o (contribs) 14:24, May 11, 2008 (UTC)

BHG; There are two POVs here . Only one is consistent with WP: NPOV. Giving priority to the British POV over decisions declared democratically by the people is unacceptable. Maybe template memo? Sarah777 (talk) 10:20, May 12, 2008 (UTC)

The democratic wish of the Irish people is not here or there on wikipedia - my understanding is that the members of the Southern Ireland parliament are denied entry to Parliament in 1921 or 22, the date of "independence" for sure (unless there is no independence until 1949, but that's a wider debate). Unionis union (talk) 10:25, May 12, 2008 (UTC)

src: d1e4pidl3fu268.cloudfront.net

When will edit the war

First, I will not appreciate the above with the responses in it. User Tone: Sarah777 leaves a lot to be desired. He has been doing slow editing wars over the past few months, and has recently been claimed as "correcting templates" that have and "obvious errors", obvious errors, my ass! Why do not you call a spade a spade and declare that you are pushing your POV. My position remains the same as previously stated by Sony-youth; "If the Commonwealth (de facto, de jure and internationally recognized) and Confederate (internationally recognized and supported, de facto and de jure so far) can be gladly rested in this section then the Republic of Ireland (not recognized internationally, de jure, but de facto) can be. ". The consensus reached is to leave the template with the Republic of Ireland in the See section as well. It is also quite clear that Sarah777 is not interested in discussing this issue. Snappy56 (talk) 10:10, May 12, 2008 (UTC)

Please watch WP: CIVIL Snappy. There is no "consensus" except in your mind. This is a simple matter of article writing from the WP perspective: NPOV. And I apologize BHG but it's getting harder for WP: AFG with an editor who obviously does not do it alone. Regardless of the "tone" of my comments, your rough personal attacks certainly not only leave a lot to be desired but violate WP: CIVIL. Sarah777 (talk) 10:27, May 12, 2008 (UTC)

Awww, petals, I do not realize you are a withered flower! Can you read my mind? I do not think so! I do not think you can lecture me on modesty, I may be dull but I am not uncivilized. How many times have you been banned for irreverence again? Snappy56 (talk) 11:00, May 12, 2008 (UTC)

Never - in a legitimate way - only with belligerent Admins. I noticed you still still edit-fight and enter POV @ template. And again I ask you to pay attention to WP: CIVIL. You try my patience here. Sarah777 (talk) 19:32, May 12, 2008 (UTC)

Sarah, it takes two to edit the war, and you and Snappy are both editing-war. You two please stop, and discuss this as long as it takes to reach a consensus, or else there is no possibility of being a warning and blocking the formal-fight eedit before long. - Brown HairedGirl (talk) o (contribs) 21:07, May 12, 2008 (UTC)

I certainly do not want to see Snappy blocked because of the edit war. I would be satisfied if he just quit. Sarah777 (talk) 06:28, May 13, 2008 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Nominated for deletion

Given the impossibility to approve any means of setting up this template to reflect WP: NPOV, I have been nominated for deletion: see Wikipedia: Templates for deletion/Log/2008 May 12 # Template: Irish_states_since_1171. - Brown HairedGirl (talk) o (contribs) 21:58, May 12, 2008 (UTC)

I think proposing for removal is a bit OTT. I have made a change that adds the group 'Notable declent states' (pre-existing - check history). I hope this is an acceptable compromise. Snappy56 (talk) 08:14, May 13, 2008 (UTC)

I would like to re-nominate this for removal; Republic of Ireland 1919 - 1922 must be given the same status as the UK and the Free State. Irish sovereignty is not determined by English Law. Sarah777 (talk) 23:08, June 25, 2008 (UTC)

There is no republic until 1949. No other country recognizes an independent Ireland until after 1921. Women's union (speech) 23:12, June 25, 2008 (UTC)

Just over 6 weeks since this template was nominated for deletion and the results saved. Just because the debate does not have the results you want, does not mean you can keep nominating it until you get your way. Try to be raised and accept the results of the debate, instead of restarting a very long debate with old cliches. Snappy56 (talk) 09:00, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

The nomination process is not finished yet, right? Please remember WP: CIVIL when inaccurately describes my comment as "a very long debate with old cliches" and please do not imply that I am not "adult". I can characterize your views on maintaining a pov-embedded template in all sorts of uncivilized ways but refrain from doing so. I hope I do not need to give you a formal warning in this regard. Also, I do not nominate templates for deletion " Just because the debate does not have the results you want " (pl remember WP: AGF) but because the current version is clutter from flagcruft and inaccurate and overpowered . Sarah777 (talk) 02:47, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

What do you mean the nomination process is not completed? BHG do it, do you suggest he make a mistake? And there you go again with WP: AGF and WP: CIVIL when someone says something you disagree with. Always a bit rich comes from users who have been blocked about 10 times due to immodesty. A debate happens, the result is fixed, you see is a minority, please respect the majority view. Nothing has changed since the last debate to get re-nominated, it's just your refusal to accept the result, and if you hope that you will get your way with the attrition then you hope in vain. You also just want to delete the template and do not offer any compromise suggestions. I added the 'Notable declember states' section that moved the Republic of Ireland out of the 'See also' category for this. Also, I think you should re-read WP: CONSENSUS. Snappy56 (talk) 10:17, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I'll remind you again about WP: CIVIL and WP: AGF. Further violations and I have to draw someone's attention to it. Now, can you show me the diff I'm asking, please? Sarah777 (talk) 16:53, June 28, 2008 (UTC)

Right too. Snappy56 (talk) 14:00, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Flag removal

I have removed all flags, some true, some look like WP: OR. I think templates look better like this. Comment Snappy56 (talk) 08:27, August 26, 2008 (UTC)

I think it's safer. If there is no clear or approved flag, you should not include anything. If not (as you notice), we tease OR or "interpretation". If for consistency this means removing all flags, then that's probably the best. Guliolopez (talk) 11:02, August 26, 2008 (UTC)

Source of the article : Wikipedia