This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Ireland Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject IrelandTemplate:WikiProject IrelandIreland articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Elections and Referendums This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles European Union This article is within the scope of WikiProject European Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the European Union on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European UnionWikipedia:WikiProject European UnionTemplate:WikiProject European UnionEuropean Union articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Is Clare Daly retiring? She is not in the list of returning incumbents, but neither is she in the list of retiring incumbents. Spleodrach ( talk) 13:55, 24 February 2024 (UTC) reply

She doesn't appear to have made a statement yet on whether she will seek re-election or not. CeltBrowne ( talk) 14:10, 24 February 2024 (UTC) reply

There is this November 2023 article from RTÉ that says she confirmed she would seek re-election. I haven't seen any other articles since though. Boardwalk.Koi ( talk) 18:30, 14 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Presumably this designation is merely serving as a placeholder unless/until one of their candidates is elected? My understanding is that they would only decide whether to apply to the S&D bloc, or alternatively the Greens, when the situation presents itself: [1] Culloty82 ( talk) 12:12, 14 March 2024 (UTC) reply

That's correct. I placed Non-Inscrits in as a placeholder/de facto. I considered adding a note for some parties about their preferred EU grouping, but for example in the case of the Social Democrats, I couldn't actually find a reliable, secondary source noting their desire to be in S&D. CeltBrowne ( talk) 23:56, 19 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Does anyone have a reliable source for John Water's candidacy? Apparently he's running in Midlands North-West. Boardwalk.Koi ( talk) 21:51, 28 March 2024 (UTC) reply

A candidate by the name of Stephen O'Rourke announced his candidacy today. www.Stephen4Europe.eu and also on Linkedin. Is this sufficient for adding him to the list on the wikipedia page? Note I am a constituent in the Dublin electoral area, and am interested in this candidate for this reason. WikipRecorder ( talk) 20:22, 6 April 2024 (UTC) reply

From my understanding of WP:SOCIALMEDIA and WP:SELFSOURCE it should be ok. There are other candidates listed here similar citations (Waters, Steenson, de Barra ,etc). Boardwalk.Koi ( talk) 22:53, 6 April 2024 (UTC) reply

I propose that the direct links to the candidates announcements are reinstated. My reasoning for this is: the direct links help independents and help people see their websites etc. The established parties and candidates have the advantage that people know them already and do not have to dig deep to find them online, whereas this can not be said for the others. Therefore, reinstating the direct links (e.g. Tweet which is announcing the candidacy) brings back a sense of fairness to the candidacy. WikipRecorder ( talk) 16:43, 15 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi @ WikipRecorder, Are you Stephen O'Rourke? I noticed you added (then removed) a COI declaration on your user page. I also noticed that you've submitted a draft page for Stephen O'Rourke. I urge you to be upfront with any conflict of interest you may have, and to avoid contributing to topics you are personally involved with. Boardwalk.Koi ( talk) 17:08, 15 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Hello Boardwalk.Koi, thank you for your message and of course for your due diligence. I am not directly related to Stephen ORourke, which is why I removed that declaration that you mentioned. I am a constituent of his, which is why I have an interest here. Please let me know if I can clarify anything else for you. WikipRecorder ( talk) 20:45, 15 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Thanks for reply and for addressing my concerns. To address your original point, I removed the references as I thought they were unnecessary, and cluttering the table. I think the article as it is now represents all candidates equally and without bias. That being said I'd like to hear what other users think about the issue and try to reach a consensus. Boardwalk.Koi ( talk) 21:26, 15 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Thank you for your feedback.

I have a question regarding the following comment on the Draft article: "Comment: Candidates for political office are rarely (if ever) notable per WP:NPOL. If he wins in the EU elections, we can reassess. Bkissin (talk) 00:25, 16 April 2024 (UTC)"

Sorry, I am new to Wiki so not sure how to respond directly to that message......

But my question is: on the basis of this person not being deemed to be NPOL according to the policy, why then do other candidates have their own Wiki page. For example, another independent has a page, but why is he deemed to be a person of interest for a wiki page but ORourke isn't? This is a genuine question from me, and I ask it in order to gain further insights into how this works. WikipRecorder ( talk) 12:41, 16 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Best place to discuss that would be over at Draft talk:Stephen O'Rourke Boardwalk.Koi ( talk) 13:04, 16 April 2024 (UTC) reply

I took the bold decision to remove the list of candidates from this page, it was reasonably reverted by CeltBrowne, and we can discuss it here. I'd argue as I put in my edit summary, the candidates these are better listed and maintained in the three constituency articles, rather than duplicating them on this page, and to the extent that we had relevant notes, they can be included in the biographical articles. Iveagh Gardens ( talk) 21:04, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply

User:Iveagh Gardens, I see and understand the good faith rationale you had in the edit history regarding removing the list of candidates but I don't think I agree with it. For most "casual" people googling/Wikipedia'ing "European Election Ireland", 2024 European Parliament election in Ireland will be their primary hub of information. Most of those people will be on their phones with each subheading on the main autoclosed to start with. For them, the page is very easily navigable, and they will (I believe) be jumping to the "candidates" section perhaps as their main destination on the page.

I think on that basis, we'd be hurting the navigability of the page and main purpose of the page by removing the candidates section. I understand the average person /can/ find the candidates by selecting their constituency, but whether they /will/ is an entirely different matter. When it comes to matters of technology, I typically don't give the average person the benefit of the doubt.

That's my take, but I'd be interested to hear what other active editors might think about this too CeltBrowne ( talk) 21:07, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply

I agree. People seeking election information are more likely to find this page, rather then their constituency's page. I think this page should list all candidates until the election occurs. Boardwalk.Koi ( talk) 12:47, 24 April 2024 (UTC) reply

The returning officers for MNW and Dublin have candidates listed under the National Party (from both factions now). At the moment the footnote on this page states that candidates "will not appear on the ballot under the label of "National Party" following a decision by the Registrar of Political Parties", however I'm not sure the references support this assertion.

In the 12th April edition of Irish Oifigúil, the decision from An Coimisiún Toghcháin reads,

I do not propose to amend the registration in the Register of Political Parties of the National Party in respect of the address of the party headquarters, the authorised officers or the details of the accounting units.

I think that could mean that both Barrett and Reynolds can nominate candidates under the NP banner. The fact that the MNW returning officer lists both Barrett and Reynolds as NP candidates seems to support this.

I also think it's noteworthy that the Dublin returning officer lists Rabharta's candidate (Cafolla) as "Non-Party". This implies that the Rabharta footnote is correct, but the NP one is not. Boardwalk.Koi ( talk) 12:37, 26 April 2024 (UTC) reply

(Answering question from my talk page on same this topic) @ Iveagh Gardens: I was going off the Irish Independent, who stated

the Electoral Commission decided to reject applications from opposing factions for the right to use the party name in forthcoming elections. [2]

and I thought at first the Irish Times source [3] was also driving at that idea, because how they phrase things in the first paragraph also seems to indicate that. However, re-reading the Irish Times article, it states

As a result no changes will be made to the Register of Political Parties which currently lists party founder Justin Barrett and James Reynolds as the authorised officers of the National Party.

It's difficult to know what to make of things now, but I suppose for the moment commonsense tells me we could/should just remove the note on the National Party for now. If the Registering Officer is listing them...I guess that how the ballot will appear? Things could change again, but we can readjust at that point. CeltBrowne ( talk) 13:41, 26 April 2024 (UTC) reply

This probably was one more for general discussion than a personal talk page! I'd agree then, we can remove that note. Iveagh Gardens ( talk) 13:46, 26 April 2024 (UTC) reply

I agree. There will probably be more definite coverage of the issue closer to the election, but for now I think the note should be removed. Boardwalk.Koi ( talk) 13:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Boardwalk.Koi (tagging as they have been involved in this discussion)

I (personally) don't believe Aontú should be on the info box table as they don't meet the 5% rule, they didn't have any seats coming into this election, nor did they win any seats. However I'm open to discussion.

I do believe I4C and the Greens should be on the info box because both parties had seats coming into this election and both parties clear (or are very near) the 5% rule.

I do wanna see some discussion though, especially because I don't want there to be a lot of reverting edits to the box. Flames675 ( talk) 22:31, 14 June 2024 (UTC) reply

I agree. They didn’t have any seats in the previous parliament, didn’t win any and didn’t win a significant share of the popular vote.

Unless there is a compelling counter argument made, I’ll remove them. Government with?? ( talk) 15:32, 15 June 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Government with?? I felt Aontú received significant media coverage and played a key part in the election, and should be included on that basis.

I'm not too pushed either way though, I don't think their inclusion in the infobox affects the quality of the article one way or the other. Boardwalk.Koi ( talk) 18:11, 15 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Well its true that they received decent coverage in the media, I don’t think they played a significant role in the election as they didn’t gain or lose seats or obtain a significant portion of the popular vote.

Thank you Government with?? ( talk) 02:55, 16 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Late to the party but I agree on including I4C and Greens as they went in holding seats and lost them. Not strongly swayed either way on Aontú but leaning towards exclusion as they don't hit the 5% rule. ser! ^{( chat to me - see my edits)} 17:21, 17 June 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Government with??

I'm bringing this discussion here instead of my personal talk page, where it never belonged in the first place.

The user tagged above has accused me of making "unproductive" edits to this page regarding changing mentions of "Ireland South" back to South, the formal name of the constituency and the one used by:

- RTÉ news on the election results pages cited when displaying results on this page ( https://www.rte.ie/news/elections-2024/results/#/european/national)

- The title of and (until the aforementioned user edited it) all mentions of the constituency on the South (European Parliament constituency)

- The Ireland Electoral Commission page describing the Irish EU constituencies ( https://www.electoralcommission.ie/european-parliament-elections/)

This was not an "unnecessary" edit but rather an attempt to continue the use of the formal and consensus term that the rest of Wikipedia has agreed to. Flames675 ( talk) 00:11, 17 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Additionally, the source cited for all of the infobox information, although outdated, also refers to the constituency as "South" and not "Ireland South"

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/elections2004/ep-election/sites/en/yourvoice/ie/candidates.html Flames675 ( talk) 00:16, 17 June 2024 (UTC) reply

South is the name of the constituency officially and legally. Ireland South is a media invention, mostly by RTE. While Ireland South is used, it is by no means a common name. Why preface the name with Ireland? There is no other EP constituency called South. Editors should refrain from changing the name of the constituency in articles, as the established consensus is to call it South, and unless that changes it should continue to be called that. Spleodrach ( talk) 00:25, 17 June 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Spleodrach

You say that Ireland South is “by no means a common name” and yet it is used by the entire Irish media and by the candidates and elected MEPs for that constituency.

The term can be found in the following articles:

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/war-of-words-between-ireland-south-european-hopefuls-over-comments-by-replacement-candidate/a1283040014.html

https://www.irishtimes.com/politics/2024/06/13/fianna-fail-claim-seat-in-south-as-mick-wallace-loses-out/

https://www.thetimes.com/world/ireland-world/article/anger-in-fine-gael-over-ireland-south-election-debacle-5gq5vxlp3

https://www.rte.ie/news/2024/0613/1454516-european-election-ireland/

https://www.businesspost.ie/politics/elections-update-final-results-expected-in-ireland-south-harris-speaks-with-limerick-mayor/

https://www.newstalk.com/news/billy-kelleher-re-elected-as-mep-for-ireland-south-1734830

https://gript.ie/will-ireland-south-see-loss-of-mick-wallace-despite-big-anti-establishment-blighe-transfer/

The entire media from centre right to far right refers to the constituency as such.

Then there’s the people who represent that constituency:

https://x.com/mlmcnamaratd/status/1801381437482144043?s=46

Michael McNamara refers to it as such in his Twitter bio.

https://seankelly.eu/

Sean Kelly does so on his website.

https://www.fiannafail.ie/meps/billy-kelleher?hsLang=en

Billy Kelleher on his party website.

https://cynthiaforeurope.ie/

Cynthia Ní Mhurchú on her campaign website.

https://x.com/kathleensf1/status/1470868989777752067?s=46

Kathleen Funchion in her Twitter bio.

It’s difficult to see how a term used by all of the people who represent this constituency and the entirety of the Irish media is by no means a common term.

You ask why the we should preface the name with Ireland. Apart from the fact that this is how it is universally referred to, there is also the fact that this constituency does not consist of the entirety or indeed any part of southern Europe, therefore it needs to be clarified that this is the constituency of southern Ireland not “the South of the EU”.

You say that the established consensus is to call it “South”. Who has established this consensus? Who has the authority to declare that a consensus exists? The established consensus amongst everyone who is not part of a small group of Wikipedia editors is to refer to it as Ireland South. If, as you claim, the established consensus on Wikipedia is to refer to this constituency as “South”, then how else would I change this other than by editing this page and starting a discussion on this matter?

Thank you Government with?? ( talk) 02:29, 17 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Who has established this consensus? Who has the authority to declare that a consensus exists?

I can ask you the same questions. Who are you to determine that individual social media accounts should decide what we title and label Wikipedia pages?

The fact you have to specify the entire center right to far right clearly shows that it's not even a common consensus among the political spectrum, but among a smaller group of politicians and others.

You also link several news sites that refer to the constituency as Ireland South which only solidifies the previous comment that the term was played up by the media instead of the formal term. The Ireland Electoral Commission, EU Description Pages, as well as the main news report used as a citation for this article (the RTÉ report cited earlier), use the formal term for the constituency. This, combined with precedent among the older elections pages and the constituency Wikipedia page has led to the decision to label it South.

As for the entire Irish media comment regarding who uses the term, there is no way to determine every single news report or tv broadcast has exclusively used that term, and it is far more likely a combination of the two has been historically used interchangeably, still not a strong enough argument to exclusively use that term.

The entire argument regarding Southern Europe I find odd as there is no constituency labelled "Southern Europe", with the closest I could find being "Southern Italy" which is already labelled as a "not to be confused with" tag on the South constituency page. It is completely clear via heavy context clues, along with the description of what part of the country South represents, what the term is referring to. The Wikipedia pages I have found that refer to the constituency have made it clear what part of Europe they are referring to, and it would be hard for someone to assume they are referring to the entirety of southern Europe. Plus, there's always the constituency page if people do get confused. Flames675 ( talk) 04:08, 17 June 2024 (UTC) reply

The name for the constituency is South, by law. A bunch of articles using Ireland South proves that it's used sometimes, but it doesn't override the fact it is legally called South. This is not a strong enough reason to change its name everywhere and even move its article to Ireland South. ser! ^{( chat to me - see my edits)} 09:38, 17 June 2024 (UTC) reply

User:Government with?? should read WP:CONSENSUS. Also, it's considered bad form to move an article while in the middle of a discussion. Spleodrach ( talk) 10:07, 17 June 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Government with??: please stop reinstalling your version repeatedly when there is actively consensus against it. Calling other changes that users make "vandalism" is extremely very bad faith engagement and is disruptive behaviour. If you think this should be included, convince other editors: don't edit war. ser! ^{( chat to me - see my edits)} 14:52, 17 June 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Ser!

By active consensus, do you mean two or three individuals who are determined to stop the constituency being named on Wikipedia what it is called everywhere else. This is the name that the elected representatives of this constituency all use and the term that every media publication appears to use. Wikipedia should aim to provide clarity and ease of access to information. Referring to a constituency in southern Ireland as “South” when it is almost universally referred to otherwise is confusing and unclear. I have provided comprehensive evidence that this is the common use term. I have had that claim refuted not by examples of the media or candidates or ordinary people referring to Ireland South merely as South but by the fact that other Wikipedia pages refer to it as such. Other than respectfully providing myriad examples from across the Irish media and the common sense argument that using the term South without qualifying it with Ireland is absurd and confusing, what more can I do to convince the small group of people who have established a “consensus” amongst themselves that Wikipedia should continue to confuse people by using a legalistic term not used by the general public? What option do I have but to revert this article back to the normal, widely used term?

Thank you Government with?? ( talk) 15:15, 17 June 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Government with??: By active consensus I mean that three editors believe it should be called its legal name. One editor disagrees. Your "option" is to respect consensus. By the way, you have now breached the WP:3RR by reverting four times on one page within 24 hours. As another editor has reverted your change, I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you didn't know about the 3RR but if you revert again a report will be filed against you. Thanks, ser! ^{( chat to me - see my edits)} 15:33, 17 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Now a new editor with 1 edit - Eastwall7 - has added Ireland South back in. Clearly a sockpuppet (or meatpuppet) of Government with??. Might be time to ask for Page protection and open an SPI. Spleodrach ( talk) 16:03, 17 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Just filed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Government with??. (It wouldn't let me link it for some reason. Strange that.) ser! ^{( chat to me - see my edits)} 16:06, 17 June 2024 (UTC) reply

thank you both, I was looking at filing a 3RR report myself but seems like a sockpuppet one works too. Flames675 ( talk) 16:12, 17 June 2024 (UTC) reply

This is a clear violation of Wikipedia’s policy on civility. This is a completely baseless, ludicrous and malicious allegation. If a Wikipedia user happening to agree with another Wikipedia user is grounds to suspect that both accounts are operated by the same person then it seems entirely likely that @ Flames675 is the sockpuppet of @ Spleodrach. Both of these accounts have repeatedly supported each other and replied with suspicious timing. I would urge you to retract this slanderous, ridiculous proposition and refrain from continuing your campaign of vandalism on this page. Government with?? ( talk) 16:15, 17 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Both Spleodrach and I have had both of our accounts for multiple years and have never (to my knowledge) collaborated on any pages together before this one. We both have extensive edit histories and vastly different page interests which should defend us both. This is clearly an accusation based out of bad faith. Flames675 ( talk) 16:18, 17 June 2024 (UTC) reply

If a Wikipedia user happening to agree with another Wikipedia user is grounds to suspect that both accounts are operated by the same person - ha. Nothing suspicious at all about how one minute after you get reverted, a new account pops up to instantly make the same change you did! But look, a report's been filed now - CheckUsers will be able to see if my suspicions are correct or not. ser! ^{( chat to me - see my edits)} 16:21, 17 June 2024 (UTC) reply

There's at least one instance of an official source using the term Ireland South: the Electoral Commission uses it in its designation of Rabharta.

Both terms are used. There's nothing partisan about the use of Ireland South: as cited above, it's used by SF as much as by FG representatives. The article title should reflect the official name of the constituency as South, while the text of the article should also refer to it being often referred to as Ireland South, with a few representative references. There are enough instances of this, as cited in the discussion above, that we shouldn't ignore that entirely. Iveagh Gardens ( talk) 09:49, 18 June 2024 (UTC) reply

I agree that we shouldn't ignore Ireland South entirely, but it shouldn't be the main term of an article. Should it be mentioned, it should mostly be on the constituency page prefaced by "the constituency is often referred to as" or something along those lines, which I know the constituency page used to have before it was edited out. I feel any mention of it on this page is unnecessary and might cause confusion. Flames675 ( talk) 15:08, 18 June 2024 (UTC) reply

I entirely agree, on both counts. The South article should mention its alternative appellation, but no need for it in this article. Iveagh Gardens ( talk) 15:48, 18 June 2024 (UTC) reply

I also agree with Iveagh Gardens statement above. Spleodrach ( talk) 20:39, 18 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Also the SPI against Government_with?? [4] has closed. It found that Eastwall7 was an unambiguous sockpuppet of Government_with??. The sock has been banned indefinitely and the master for a week. It is disappointing that a new editor (< 50 edits) should resort to sockpupperty so early. Not to mention accusing me of being a sock of Flames675, lol! If the user:Government_with?? returns I do hope that they will be civil and not so aggressive in tone, and respectful of other editors and of the established consensus. Spleodrach ( talk) 20:39, 18 June 2024 (UTC) reply

I edited the constituency page to mention that it is referred to as Ireland South. Hopefully that suffices but if not also feel free to edit it. Flames675 ( talk) 21:39, 18 June 2024 (UTC) reply