![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 10 |
I didn't know where else to write this, but as someone who has no vested interest in this conflict, and who just wanted to learn about it, I have to say that this Wikipedia topic page was disappointing.
Basic issues aren't defined - for instance, "The Troubles" are simply not given a basic definition. There is a skeletal history of Northern Ireland but nothing comprehensive.
The writing in the whole article is of questionable quality.
I have no doubt that this is a result of political bickering, which I am not interested in being involved with. All I can say is: sort your shit out, and clean this thing up. If the Arab-Israeli conflict pages are decent (I am an expert and a partisan in THAT conflict and I think the wiki pages are reasonably balanced and of decent quality) then surely you guys can bring the quality up on this one.
The ulster banner should be from the infobox becauce it is no longer offical, this is an encyclopedic article and should use the only offical flag for Northern Ireland which is the Union Flag and has been since the the Parliament of Northern Ireland was abolished in 1973. While the old flag may be used largely in the unionist community it is not sanctioned by the government.--
Barry
talk
19:04, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
Yes, lets take the coat of arms out. Why not take every thing out that does not have "de facto" or "de jure" status. What we need to realise is that Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom and not everything in the United Kingdom is written down in law. Soon we will have a blank page. Djegan 21:01, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
The most recent citation [2] does not show that the Union Flag is the official flag of Northern Ireland but simply that it must be flown on certain days on certain building and the use of the Royal Standard and European Union; and a prohibition on other flags. Djegan 21:35, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
If we're going to have the "Ulster" Banner on, then we should also have the tricolour on and explain that they are the two flags used by either side of the community. Derry Boi 12:29, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
The Israel comparison does not work Israel is a state with a government that recognises their own flag the banner was the flag of a body that was abolished 30 years ago having it in the infobox is pov the best solution would be to have no flag as the British Government does not recognizes any except the Union Flag there should just be a link to the flag of Northern Ireland. --
Barry
talk
14:03, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
The former government of Northern Ireland standard (unofficially known as the "Ulster Banner") was NEVER the flag of Northern Ireland, it was the standard of the former government of Northern Ireland.
This was the standard for the "government" in N. Ireland from Irish partition until stormont suspension in the early 70s. As a flag, it represents a government which openly treated Catholics as second class citizens (a "Protestant governement for the Protestant people" as a former N. Ireland First Minister once proclaimed on Storemont steps).
The usage of this flag is not unlike the usage of the Nazi Germany flag, in terms of offense caused to the people it is offending.
The Northern Ireland page does not require flag. It is a clarly touchy subject, which many opposing view. Some claim the Irish Tricolour should be used, some the Ulster Flag, some the former standard of the government of N. Ireland flag. These apposing views make up the disputed "Flags of Northern Ireland" page, which clearly explains to people what the debate is about and gives them any information they may need or want on flags.
This is not a street corner or a lamp post, an impartial internet encyclopedia should not be used to push opinions and point of views. In order to remain fair and factual, and to lessen any offense to people affected by the subject, flags should not be used. The standard of the currently suspended government of N. Ireland (which is now to be re-opened) should be used if anything, since the flag of an establishment 30 years in the past is currently being used.
See the debate Below and post replys there
i disagree the aussie /new zealand flags both have the union flag no problem there/here also the red hand of northern ireland appears to be one of the oldest seals in the british irish isles? why disregard your history i personly like the northern flag i have been told the southern irish /republic flag is green catholic white unite orange protestant?having travlled a little most northern people i have met regardless of religion or politic refer to themself as ulster.or northern irish so they deserve there own flag.as regards some people i have met from the south tell me its not orange but gold on the flag i dont see anything wrong with the union flag as it seems to represent the majority.or the red hand as it predates british/ viking/or any other imports what about the harp i notice the royal irish regiment use perhaps with the red hand inserted in the center white background either way have a comp pick designs and let the people pick as for now to have a country with no flag is rediculous keep the red hand one on here till some one sorts it out david --unsigned comment posted by
User:58.162.74.176 10.30am, 2 May 2007
The article states :
The population of Northern Ireland was estimated as being 1,710,300 on 30 June 2004. In the 2001 census, 53.1% of the Northern Irish population were Protestant, (Presbyterian, Church of Ireland, Methodist and other Protestant denominations), 43.8% of the population were Roman Catholic, 0.4% Other and 2.7% none.[3][4]
Using the CAIN data
Pres 20.7 % CoI 15.3 % Meth 3.5 % Other Christian 6.1 %
Totalling 45.6 %
The total response was (100-13.88) = 86.1 %
Giving a total non-RC christian pop of (45.6/86.1) = 53%
Am I doing something wrong, or are we counting all non-RC christians as protestant? 86.12.249.63 14:03, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
I would make the assumption that and this is an assumption as to why non- RC Christians are counted as protestant is the reason that there is so few, after all the population of Northern Ireland is hardly gigantic. This also reminds me of a stipulation within the Patten report on the reform of the RUC that the new PSNI be made up of 50% catholic and 50% non RC, this is not a direct quote but it certainly does give a bit of weight to the idea of not counting individual Protestants as zzuuzz hinted at earlier.-- Edengmcc 02:14, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Is there any reliable way of working this out? Derry Boi 16:14, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Whoever has been sorting this out, they have been mislead in certain areas.
Firstly, the term "Northern Irish" should not be used in the article to describle all people of Northern Ireland. Although I don't have a personal problem with the definition, the term takes away the right of all people in Northern Ireland to identify themselves as Irish, as most people tend to do nowadays, in regional identity (Unionists, with Nationality of British) or Nationality (Nationalists). Ian Paisley himself has stated he would never deny the fact that he's an Irishman, and it's listed on his quotes on this very website, is there anything more concrete than that lol?
The term "People of Northern Ireland, "Citizens of Northern Ireland" should always be used, as is the case in all official documentation.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by BBX ( talk • contribs) 02:58, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Tripe!! "Northern Irish" is perfectly adequate. I don't see how this takes away anyones "right" to anything. One can describe themselves "Northern Irish" and British. Likwise one can describe themselves as "Northern Irish" and "Irish". I could describe myself as "Northern Irish", "British" or "Irish" depending on context. Jonto 00:03, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Northern Irish is a ridiculous term - iv never heard of 'republican irish' - if Ireland had been partition 16:16 counties which one would be Irish? Just because one area is smaller and unioned with another does not make it any less Irish. If your to use the argument 'not irish at all' because 400 hundred years ago my ancestors
came from Scotland means that no ethinic person in Britain or ireland is part of those nations. Your Irish. SIDDOWN
Secondly ..
The Agreement - as listed - states that all people of Northern Ireland have the birth right of either Irish or British nationality of both. Irish nationality has always been extended to the people of Northern Ireland, in fact, the Republic government claimed the territory until the 1998 Agreement, which furthers the arguement.
By claiming all Northern Ireland people are British (which is how I percieve the current paragraph) it takes away the rights set out in the agreement of having Irish OR British OR both nationalities, it does not state that a person is born with either nationality, it states they are born "citizens of Northern Ireland", which is an area that both the Republic of Ireland and Britian extend Nationality to. This section needs re-worded to fairly reflect the rights of all people of Northern Ireland and the diverse national law we are proud to have. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by BBX ( talk • contribs) 02:58, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Since there is no dispute, I will alter the section. I have no doubt, however, that is will be reverted back to the incorrect statement within a short amount of time though, as seems to be the case with quite a lot of sections of this page.
The former government of Northern Ireland standard (often referred here incorrectly as the "flag of Northern Ireland" should be replaced as it has no official merit. It has not been used for over 30 years and when it was, it was the standard of the Stormont government, not the flag of N. Ireland. Many Catholics find this flag offensive as it represents a government which openly discriminated against them for 50 years.
If the flag is to be listed as "de facto", then the Irish tricolour should be listed as "de facto" for Ireland, as it is indeed the de facto flag of the island.
I see no reason why a flag should be used. The people of Northern Ireland lean away from usage of flags, as they are a sore spot for us all. The flag of the UK is not used for England, Scotland, Wales or any other colony, so I see no reason for it's usage on the N. Ireland page, other than political agendas.
There should be no flag used, the current standard of the government of N. Ireland should be used if anything (the blue flax symbol, which I can get upon request), and all "flags" should be kept in the flags of Northern Ireland section/page, to keep political agendas of this page.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by [[User: BBX | BBX ]] ([[User talk: BBX |talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/ BBX |contribs]]) 03:07, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
The flag officially under United Kingdom law for Northern Ireland is the Union Jack so the flag for Northern Ireland on here should be the Union Jack too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Somethingoranother ( talk • contribs)
This is not an official flag, it is the former flag of the Northern Ireland House of Commons 1922-72, its use in this infobox is misleading as the flag has no more legal status then the Irish Tricolour. The flax banner of the Northern Ireland Assembly should be used, as this is not seen as offensive by either side of the community.-- padraig3uk 09:25, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Look, this is just getting really silly - this debate has been covered over and over again. The "Ulster Banner" is NI's de facto regional flag. In UK contexts "officialness" does not really exist. It is not "official", "unofficial", or "former official" as all these terms are rather meaningless, and hence displaying dates of its "officialness" is also meaningless. Since the old Stormont government the flag always was the de facto civil flag - just because the government was prorogued does not mean that its de facto civil status changes. It still is de facto, no other widely recognised flag is in existence, and something being described as "de facto" does not require universal support. Jonto 16:44, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
I have protected this article, please reach consensus on this talk page about the appropriate wording for the infobox. It is clear there is not agreement on the edits being made, so you shouldn't keep reverting things on the article... Thanks/ wangi 14:33, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
I have reverted the flag / arms descriptions to the previous stable version (form a sample of previous versions), hopefully this is suitable. / wangi 21:56, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
I think we should keep the old flag and coat of arms of the government of Northern Ireland. No claims are made on the page that they are the current official items, actually it says "(former official)" which I think is enough. The symbols are easily recognisable and people who want the details should click on the link to the respective article.
The flag of the former government may not be currently official, but this article is about Northern Ireland which is part of the United Kingdom, and many things in the United Kingdom are by convention and tradition. The former flag is perhaps one of the easiest recognisable flags of Northern Ireland, indeed if a different flag was used I wonder how long before this and other articles would refect the "new consensus", maybe never. Djegan 17:23, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Our options are:
Take your pick. :) Martin 17:30, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Astrotrain, the only local authorities that display the UB are a few Unionist Dominated councils, the vast majority of local councils don't fly any flags from their buildings, out of respect for both communities.-- padraig3uk 12:11, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
d) for now, and possibly c) when/if the Assembly resumes. If I'm reading this correctly, then currently, officially, NI does not have a flag. Wikipedia should reflect reality, not have one just because an infobox 'needs' one. By all means include the old flag, and/or de facto flag in the body, but with less prominence than the top of the page and with a proper explanation as to the status. Bastun 16:36, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
The Assembly hasn't got a flag yet, and a logo cannot be used. The reality is that NI does have a flag- its just not used by the Northern Ireland Office or the Police. Astrotrain 16:44, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
It would appear that the consensus is to remove the Ulster Banner and coat of arms from the infobox, I propose they now be removed, and they be included in the main article itself as historical items.-- padraig3uk 01:37, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
I have moved the images of the flag and coat of arms into the main article, I also created a new infobox - Infobox UK N-Ireland without the fields for flag etc - so that I could remove the images from the infobox. Is everyone ok with this.-- padraig3uk 11:31, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Well, there doesn't have to be a flag in the info box, but as most articles about countries (or administrative regions, or political units, or whatever) seem to have one, it is only reasonable to look for an alternative if we're advocating the removal of the Ulster Banner. While Northern Ireland does not have its own flag, there is a flag (shared by the rest of the UK) that has been legislated to be used for official purposes. Its use here would avoid any POV issues, IMHO. Martin 23:31, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Astrotrain, only yourself and Stu seem to want to retain the UB and coat of arms in the infobox, everyone else agrees it should be removed from the infobox. So instead of going round in circles here, can we decide on wether to replace them with something else or remove all flags and symbols from the infobox completely.-- padraig3uk 15:32, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Let's think about this: everyone recognises the Northern Irish flag as representing Northern Ireland. Those that don't are likely those whose POV would be that Northern Ireland doesn't, or shouldn't, exist at all. Following this logic then, we can see that those people would presumably not have any interest in editing an article about Northern Ireland.
The world, as exemplified by worldwide organisations such as FIFA, recognises and uses the Northern Ireland flag to represent Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland is, by the way, a country... though it is a rather unique country, being a country within a country.
My assertion is that it is fact that the flag that represents Northern Ireland is the one that has been used in the article's infobox for months, and that it is petty, agenda-driven POV to mount a campaign to remove it. The next logical step is to campaign to have the article itself removed, claiming that Northern Ireland itself is "POV". If you have no interest in Northern Ireland, then don't edit the article.. edit something else instead.
If and when the Northern Ireland Assembly starts again, and those elected officials decide on a new flag for Northern Ireland then, of course, that change should be reflected in this article. -- Mal 17:31, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
I have to completely agree with the above my Mal. It is not in some Irish Republicans' agenda to have anything related uniquely to NI. As has happened in the past certain members (one in particular) are showing obvious signs of an Irish Republican agenda to subtly remove or undermine all aspects of NI culture/identity. The entire debate has dissolved into those with a republican agenda agreeing with each other and posting excessively, with most other not posting or caring because the same issue has been repeated over and over (check history) with exactly the same outcome of keeping the flag.
Jonto
17:47, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
It would appear that certain users are determined to promote a certain POV on this article, and are determined to resist any attempt to rectify that problem, this is totaly contary to the rules of Wikipedia.-- padraig3uk 13:48, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Consensus was achieved at the time that [User:Padraig3uk|padraig3uk]] removed the banner. Since then we have had a refusal to respect the consensus; yet when the 'consensus' manufactured is against a perceived 'Nationalist' pov it appears to achieve the status of a Religious Orthodoxy. With High Priests interpreting all manner of subsidiary matters based on the imagined 'consensus'. The consensus is the banner be removed. ( Sarah777 20:11, 25 February 2007 (UTC))
Concencus was reached that the UB should be removed from the infobox, that concencus is being ignored by certain users pushing their POV, and have made that very clear here. The fact remains the UB has no legal status, and should not be promoted within the infobox.-- padraig3uk 00:44, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Mal, and Jonto, are you suggesting that only wikipedians that recognise that Northern Ireland is British are allowed to have a opinion on the content of the Northern ireland article.--padraig3uk 18:17, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Padraig, I think you need to seriously read what I had written again if you're asking that question. Otherwise be very careful about what words you're trying to fit into other peoples' mouths. -- Mal 05:05, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
I know what your question was in response to Padraig. I'm telling you not to put words in others' mouths. Thank you. -- Mal 15:22, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
I politely ask Astrotrain to remove the banner from the infobox to reflect the consensus. There is little point having a vote on 4 options when the result (d: no flag) can be totally ignored. The status quo is now NO FLAG. Anyone wishing to change this should call for a change and discuss the matter before tampering with the infobox. ( Sarah777 20:20, 25 February 2007 (UTC))
Astrotrain 13:45, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
I've noticed that flags.net now states that the Union Flag is Northern Ireland's official flag. [6] I wonder if someone over there is following our discussion? :) Martin 20:57, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
:*Remember we are simply seeing if there is a consensus - please no discussion in this section, feel free to discuss above or below, cheers
Note: In light of the strawpoll carried out here, isn't it time to put this issue to rest, and remove the flags froms the infobox. Then editors can spend their time helping to improve this and other N Ireland articles instead of edit warring over this issue.-- padraig3uk 07:54, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Indeed so, hence the text "Former flag of Northern Ireland 1953-72" underneath it. Our readers can read, you know. -- Guinnog 20:02, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I've been watching this discussion for a while, but haven't contributed to anything until now - and don't really want to get involved either (has nothing really to do with me). But why not just wait a couple of weeks to see what the assembly does. If the assembly meets and its the Union Flag they fly (not just on day one, but over time) then its pretty obvious that the Union Flag is the flag of NI. If they make noises about changing it then leave the Ulster Banner in place until they figure what it should be. -- sony-youth talk 10:30, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
-- padraig3uk 11:28, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes it represents the UK as a whole, but it is also has official individual usage in NI. Stu ’Bout ye! 13:51, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Why does it have to be flown all the time? That makes no difference? The reason it should be used here (if the UB is removed) is that it is "the only official flag that represents Northern Ireland". They can't be removed now, the status quo has to remain until the debate is over. sony youth's idea to wait and see what the Assembly does is a good idea, but if the debate has gone on here for this long I can only imagine how long the Assembly will take. I'm sure we're all pretty much sick of this debate, I know I am. Mediation or arbitration anyone? While mediation has worked in other recent disputes, I think it will make the debate last another six months. Arbcom may reject it for not having been to mediation, but I think we've shown sufficient effort to resolve the problem. Thoughts? My feeling is that it should be referred to Arbcom, by someone independent to the discussion. Stu ’Bout ye! 15:01, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
(deindent) As has been discussed here ad nauseam, while the Ulster Banner is not perfect and offends a section of the Northern Ireland population, it is still the closest we have got to a flag for the info box. Taken with the text explaining its unofficial status, I think it is as good as we will get, at least until the situation on the ground develops to allow a new flag to be adopted. There was certainly no consensus to remove it; please do not do so again. Thanks. -- Guinnog 16:00, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Just sectionising this, easier to follow. This is some marathon. I don't agree with you Martin, but I will say this - you are one stubborn wicket keeper! regards ( Sarah777 20:19, 3 April 2007 (UTC))
Padraig, you've made all these points before. But it doesn't change the fact that the dispute has not been resolved. Again, there is no consensus and your POV and feelings about the flags in question is irrelevant. I'm not going to break 3RR so I'm asking you to revert yourself so that this can be sorted out without a revert war. You seem to consider the matter over with, but it is not. We haven't even got to the second stage of the dispute resolution process. What you are doing is against policy. Stu ’Bout ye! 09:54, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
As I've just broken 3RR, feel free to report me. However this was to ensure the correct procedure is followed. This dispute is not yet over and the stages of the dispute resolution process are still to be completed. Therefore changing the article from the status quo is breaking process. Stu ’Bout ye! 11:05, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
You are avoiding answering the question Padraig. You argue that the UB glorifies Terrorism because it is used by its supporters. Now, by the same token, you must also argue that it glorifies football, glorifies historians, glorifies the athletics team at the commonwealth games and glorifies anyone else who uses it. You argument is afterall, POV by association, which is very contrived. If you are going to use the POV argument you need to justify it. If you want to argue on other matters, go ahead, but don't try to muddy the issue. Can we please settle POV first?-- ZincBelief 11:15, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
I see the UB flying from many Gov. buildings, including near my own house the Castlereagh borough council offices, it flys every day from that building, surely they are breaking the law? I also see it as I pass the Island Centre in Lisburn, flying from the flag pole of the council offices. As Northern Ireland is part of the UK, if this flag and coat of arms is to kept away from the info box, then surely it should be taken off all the other home nations of the UKs info boxes, to keep consistency within Wikipedia and the countries of the UK. -- Cka4004 12:38, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
By much, but not the majority of the population Vintage, however as the flag is not officially used, and as it has been taken down, the Union Flag should be used, however rare that may seam, but it is the flag used to represent NI at present across the world outside of sport.If some people refuse to accept the flag and coat of arms then I find their logic hard to understand, however in keeping with the other country infoboxes in the rest of the UK or infact that of the ROI then the Union Flag should be used if others cannot agree to accept the UB. -- Cka4004 17:36, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
I agree with Martin, -- Cka4004 17:53, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
"If D gets a majority, then B will have to be put in place." Mal.
User:Stubacca seems to be shouting (Good God!) a similar view. As previously stated, D isn't an option - Stu.
So can I merely assert calling the article about my COUNTRY by the title "RoI" is not an option? (Think of all the argument and hassle that would save!)
Excuse me while I chuckle, but this does not sound like like either democracy or consensus to me! ( Sarah777 21:48, 2 March 2007 (UTC))
Nor is Wiki here as a vehicle for your political pov. The consensus is obvious. We HAVE had a vote on whether we should have a flag in the infobox! Result: NO.
"if we have a vote at all" - I think you will find we have just had one.
"assuming it is agreed that we should have a flag..." Bizarre. We have just agreed NOT to have a flag. ( Sarah777 23:58, 2 March 2007 (UTC))
Nope. I definitely see a vote! What browser are you using? ( Sarah777 12:20, 3 March 2007 (UTC))
And another thing: please can we leave the flags as they are until we achieve some sort of consensus, or at least until it is clear that there are a majority in favour of removing/replacing them? If someone disputes that a consensus has been reached, it means that there is no consensus. Martin 17:58, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Can I just point out the WP is NOT a democracy. The purpose of a straw poll is not to define the consensus. It is to help editors see where a voluntary consensus might be drawn from. Frelke 19:00, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Sorry Martin, I cannot agree with your suggestion re 'leaving the flag' (Option A; outvoted consistently) OR with the alternative of the Union Jack (Option B - virtually no support). While this discussion continues the "status quo" is no flag in the infobox. Please don't engage in a revert war.
And if Wiki isn't a democracy, fine. But then policy must be whatever I say it is. So back to changing the RoI name; it being manifestly incorrect and an insult to my COUNTRY. ( Sarah777 01:10, 4 March 2007 (UTC))
Martin, I am aghast that you imply I am not 'playing by the rules'. You should support that with evidence or retract.
I am also aghast at your remark re the "RoI" issue that I am "not engaging with the actual issues"! I have written hundreds of words on the issue, debated all angles - frankly all I see in response is a)abuse and personal attacks b)accusations of Bad Faith and C) 'arguments that merely keep repeating that black is really white.
On the vote; are we to leave it open till people stop voting - or until the result changes? And what of the declared position of several pro-Banner editors who have announced IN ADVANCE that the vote can be ignored? I don't recall you chastising them.
There was a consensus and then it was rejected. It is this rejection we are currently voting on. (As for the English language - no chiding of "Mal" for saying that there is no vote?!) Also, the two most recent reversions by User:Panelcourt and User:Usualcoast - both clear Sockpuppets who reverted the edits by User:Padraig3uk and then mine. So were I to leave the current set-up I would be leaving some vandalism in place. As for what "others think", well, I may have views on what they think too you know.
My only aim here is to remove the pov that has become so ingrained in Ireland-related articles the minority of established editors can't even recognise it anymore. So obviously "my cause" will not find favour with the pov pushers. ( Sarah777 04:24, 4 March 2007 (UTC))
Dunno. Do you? Clearly they are socks though. Or something similar. They made up names solely to revert the Banner, did they not? ( Sarah777 14:05, 4 March 2007 (UTC))
Sarah777: "no chiding of "Mal" for saying that there is no vote?!" Perhaps you didn't noticed the tense that I used: "because we haven't voted on that issue yet".
You say: "My only aim here is to remove the pov that has become so ingrained in Ireland-related articles". But let's make two things clear. Firstly, this is specifically a Northern Ireland-related article, in case you hadn't noticed. Secondly, the encyclopedia is about fact... the fact is that there currently exist no flag which specifically represents Northern Ireland, other than the Northern Ireland flag.
Padraig, to address your point about replacing the Northern Irish flag with the Union Jack in the infobox... the creator of the straw poll made four options. I believe the four options should be reduced to three (A, B and C) because having an infobox with a blank space is not acceptable at all to me. Therefore, before we have a vote on A, B or C, I think we should have had a vote as to whether there should be a flag in the infobox or nothing. If the result is that there should be a flag, then a vote should commence on which particular flag (or symbol, in the case of the Assembly logo) it should be. -- Mal 07:35, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
The pure conjecture about a chain of edits that will lead to the "elimination" of the NI article is nonsense; - using such arguments one could assign any motive to any edit and hypothesise any string of FUTURE edits leading to any result.
Allowing arguments such as yours above would lead to complete chaos; and thus must be ruled out of order.
The fact that the box has a facility for inserting a flag is utterly irrelevant. I think you must seriously address your obvious inability to seperate you pov from your function as an editor. Regards ( Sarah777 01:04, 11 March 2007 (UTC))
having an infobox with a blank space is not acceptable at all to me - Mal. Oh dear, that's unfortunate, because having a flag is unacceptable to me.
There's no valid reason not to have a flag in the infobox. - AND no valid reason to have a flag either.
Eh..Mal. We HAVE HAD a vote. Result: no flag. It is becoming very difficult to assume 'good faith' when you deny what is clearly written on this page.
Every other country/state etc article has one. - Stu. So what? To quote Mal let's make two things clear. Firstly, this is specifically a Northern Ireland-related article, in case you hadn't noticed. Secondly, the encyclopedia is about fact... the fact is that there currently exists no flag which specifically represents Northern Ireland
So, I guess the only way to sort this is with a vote. Hold on...we HAD a vote. But some minority editors continue to try and push their pov on the regardless of the views of the community in general. ( Sarah777 21:33, 9 March 2007 (UTC))
[de-indent]Contrary to what you believe to be true, the facts support what I have said - there is no flag that represents Northern Ireland specifically, other than the Northern Ireland flag. The flag was designed for that purpose. Until either another flag it made in place of it, or Northern Ireland ceases to exist, the current Northern Ireland flag represents Northern Ireland. -- Mal 04:05, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
De facto is good enough in many, many other areas of Wikipedia.. and is actually essential at times with regard to UK-related subjects, considering its system of law. That the Northern Ireland flag is the flag that represents, specifically, Northern Ireland is and has been verified. It is not an opinion. -- Mal 04:05, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Dislike, commotion, disruption. Gotta hand it to you Mal you obviously think the rules governing 'no personal attacks' don't apply to you! Actually I think all three words describe your attitude and activity - plus paranoia - please show me where I have been trying to 'hide' NI (other than on this flag issue).
You won't find any example Mal. So I guess an apology and retraction are in order.
In case I haven't made myself clear, NO FLAG is the decision; the status quo. The current article having been protected by two sockpuppets. It is a measure of my immense patience and desire for compromise that I haven't engaged in an edit war. I call on you to cease your vexatious editing. ( Sarah777 08:49, 12 March 2007 (UTC))
Martin, I may have overstated my degree of aghastness; but I seriously believe (and I have read all the Wiki policies) that your take on the current state of consensus is mistaken. "No flag" is the status quo. Nor do I believe that the default is the UF; "no flag" is the default. You and some others may assertthat it is; the clear majority appear to feel differently. And if majority views are not consensus, and votes are only straw-polls then how come I am constantly referred to "consensus" and "the majority" in relation to the RoI article? There is a contradiction at the heart of your reasoning.
Nor have you addressed the question of the Sockpuppets who restored your (mistaken) version of the status quo or the vote pre-emption by several pro-Banner folk. (Not implying you had anything to do with the puppets; but their edits prevented me changing back under the 3RR). ( Sarah777 01:13, 5 March 2007 (UTC))
And you have no such suspicions? You see nothing odd about two new Users signing up within minutes of one another simply to revert the banner? No? And "no flag" is the status quo as I have explained before. After the initial discussion some weks back Padraig3uk declared the change to "no flag" agreed and the change was made. After this some small number of editors decided they wanted to change the status quo and add the banner to the infobox. You are not suggesting that Padraig3uk has no authority to declare consensus when it appeared clear at least 2/1 (never mind 3/2) had expressed in favour? And if Padraig3uk can't do that...who can? You? Ben? Sony? ( Sarah777 02:33, 5 March 2007 (UTC))
The
British Isles template has had some new functionality added arising from a discussion on the
Ireland talk page. The template can now be either inserted on a page as usual (i.e. {{British Isles}}
) or, depending on what the community of each article agree to, another title can be given to the template on a page-by-page basis (e.g. {{British Isles|Title Will Go Here}}
).
The consensus reached on the Ireland page was "Great Britain, Ireland & the Isle of Man", this is also being used on the Republic of Ireland page. On 'joint' pages, such as British Isles or British Isles (terminology), "The British Isles - or Great Britain, Ireland & the Isle of Man" is the being used at present.
I'm not involving myself in this business any further than just to let people know about it. If the community here want to change the title then the possibility exists.
(By way of a short explanation, the term "Great Britain, Ireland & the Isle of Man" was chosen on the Ireland page because it was the most politically neutral while still encompassing everyone that the term "British Isles" does.)
-- sony-youth 20:30, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
"Great Britain, Ireland & the Isle of Man" That's quite a mouthful alright. What a bunch of ridiculously enduglant PC rubbish. beano 23:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Agree with beano - we should simply say any reference to Ireland being part of the BRITISH Isles is forbidden on Wiki. In every article and in all contexts. As compromise does not seem to be the order of the day here anymore. ( Sarah777 23:13, 25 February 2007 (UTC))
We have a situation whereby their are three spoken languages and two sign languages listed as "Official language(s)". Is this just plainly correct or a pipe dream? Djegan 01:02, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Surely the six counties are a terrotory under military occupatoin. It is a territory and it is under military occupation. You don't see the army out on the streets in Britain. Derry Boi 13:18, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
As far as I am aware Northern Ireland is illegaly held. One may say that 'Oh, but, um, those Presbyterians and Anglicans are the majority and thus UK troops should be there to protect them!'. Bullshit. Give me one time in modern irish history when Protestants were hideously attacked to the point they needed the UK to come help? Yet, one can roll off the times Catholic lifes have been harmed. Why can the Gardai or Irish Army or even the UN not take the defence of the province? 3thought 22:25, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
So you're saying just because Scots came over and formed the majority it is rightly theirs? Surely, one would wthink, it is the land of the people who had it there at one time. Those people, oddly enough, are the Irish. As Paul McCartney said Give Ireland back to the Irish. I am a staunch supporter of the Belfast Agreement but would consider myself a Republican. For me it is just a matter of time until re-unification comes. In the mean time may peace reach Northern Ireland and bring democracy. My above comments were rash and taken in a sweep of a tad of wee anger. Apologies for the politik. Oh, and 'leave whenever thery're asked to'? I'm sorry, but thats a poor point. The SS could have stop killing if asked by authority as could pratically any other army (or part of). Of course they'll leave when asked...thats just, um, pure sense. 3thought 19:25, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
This is silly. Don't feed the troll. -- sony-youth talk 23:11, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
I agree with the majority of posters here. It is definitely not, by any sane and rational measure, under military occupation. In relation to this point, a debate on the history of settlement, invasion, etc., in Ireland is both pointless and fruitless. If you decide to go back in history to justify one opinion or the other, then where do you stop? Go back to before about 10,000B.C. and there was no human settlement. It doesn't help the debate and isn't relevant to the point. I think the only period that should be discussed is the present and it is clear that NI is not occupied by a foreign military force. And I don't think that anyone would disagree that it currently forms part of the UK, whatever their personal wishes and feelings on the rights, wrongs, etc. ELBBT 82.45.213.202 17:15, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
There are many countries in the new world where the indigenous peoples were dispossessed of their lands centuries ago.
Ireland is my home country!!!!!! I'm obsessed!
If anybody feels like replacing the map in the infobox with Image:Europe location N-IRL.png, feel free to do it. — Alex ( T| C| E) 06:59, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Between the passing of the Royal and Parliamentary Titles Act 1927 and the Ireland Act 1949, it seems that the title of the crown, with respect to Ireland (island), changed from 'King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland' to 'King of Great Britain' and separately 'King of Ireland'. Clearly, the King of Ireland title applied to the Irish Free State, commonwealth realm that it was, and the King was advised on matters for the King of Ireland by his free state ministers. However, are we also to understand that the King of Ireland was also king in Northern Ireland, but that in respect of his northern irish duties, he took advice from his Westminister ministers ? Or his Stormont ministers, through the Governor of Northern Ireland ? The alternative would be that the King of Great Britain was King within Northern Ireland during this period. That would, perhaps, make more sense as it is the current arrangement, but slightly odd, given that the title of the monarch at that time (as King of Great Britain, and not yet - until the 1949 act - King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland).
Does anyone know what the true position is here ?
Many thanks.-- 203.218.93.53 05:26, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
As always discussions re discrimination are a tricky subject and people tend to deal in black and white assertations that are not backed up by the evidence. I think user Sony-youth read my old edit...
"Some Unionists argue that any discrimination was not just because of religious or political bigotry, but also the result of more complex socio-economic, socio-political and geographical factors."
... as denying that discrimination occurred or indicating that some unionists hold that viewpoint. It was not, the key phrase being "was not just because of" and it does not deny discrimination occurred but is trying to indicate that it is a complex issue instead of the usual black and white analysis. I am sure some unionists are discrimination deniers, but that is not what I said. My point was that some unionists, CAIN says many and others, debate the nature and extent of discrimination. This is not the same as denying discrimination occured and is not discussed as a controversial viewpoint on CAIN etc. I would say not indicating that there is a debate over the nature and extent of discrimination is more controversial and only selectively representing the issues.
I quote from Whyte 1983 "The consensus among those who have looked at the evidence dispassionately is that the picture is neither black nor white, but a shade of grey."
The following quote from Majority-Minority Differentials: Unemployment, Housing and Health by Martin Melaugh Chapter 9 is also apt.
"Perhaps the most important consequence of this was the creation of a perception among the total Catholic population of a more widespread and systematic form of direct discrimination than the currently available evidence would support. Nevertheless, the Catholic allegations of discrimination by a number of local government districts, predominantly in the south and west of the region, were substantiated in many respects by later investigations (Cameron Report, 1969). There is also evidence that Catholics, in a few areas where they were in control of a local authority, discriminated against Protestants. As Catholics were less likely to be in a position to exercise such discrimination there was less of it; this is not in any way to excuse that discrimination which was carried out."[3]
The line.."Others believe that discrimination was a reality; David Trimble, the former First Minister of Northern Ireland, openly described Northern Ireland as having been a "cold house for Catholics" during the period.".. further indicates that my preceding sentence has been misunderstood and anyway Trimble's comments do not refute the fact that discrimination is a complex issue.
I have previously gone through this and would like to think those changing the paragraph will read it properly before getting hot under the collar.
-- Strangelyb 09:48, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
“ | Some Unionists argue that any discrimination was not just because of religious or political bigotry, but also the result of more complex socio-economic, socio-political and geographical factors. Others, such as former First Minister of Northern Ireland, David Trimble, openly described Northern Ireland as having been a "cold house for Catholics" during the period. | ” |
Thanks for the clarification Sony-youth. I do however think that though Trimble described NI as a cold house for Catholics this is not the same as him saying that discrimnation is not a complex issue. From my perspective it still appears to be trying to counteract a misunderstood viewpoint in the previous sentence. Anyway from my knowledge of Trimble's opinions he is one of the "Some Unionists" arguing for example that the Nationalist policy of abstaining from the workings of the nascent N.I state was a contributing factor. I had previously refrained from detailing the counter arguments (not neccessarily my own) to discrimination being only the result of bigotry, wholesale and solely by unionists because it would only attract hotheads and is probably better dealt with in a separate article. I think it is clearer as it stood. -- Strangelyb 11:27, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
I think these should be reworked.
The Towns and villages section is just a list. The Towns in Northern Ireland, Villages in Northern Ireland and List of places in Northern Ireland links should be moved to the See also section at the end, and the section removed.
The Places of interest section is again just a list. If the article is going to progress to a FA, lists are frowned upon. Some entries on the list are already covered elsewhere in the article, eg Mountains of Mourne and Lough Neagh. So there's no problem removing them. The sentences on them could be expanded though. Entries on the list that aren't covered elsewhere can be covered elsewhere.
And lastly the History section should be first as far as I know, ie after the lead. Thoughts? Stu ’Bout ye! 13:26, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
"Can we get away from questioning people's POV? I believe there have been some legitimate points raised on both sides, and these have not been addressed. Saying that people want to remove the Ulster Banner because they are Nationalists, or they want to keep it because they are Unionists is all very interesting I'm sure, but it has absolutely no bearing on the issue in question. Indeed, appeal to motive is a logical fallacy. Let's deal with the issues raised, instead of bickering about how POV everyone else is. Every single editor has a POV, but if we assume good faith and try to reach a consensus (and a consensus is more than the tyranny of the majority), it doesn't have to be to the determinant of the article. Martin 23:21, 25 February 2007 (UTC)"
I quote this above because the charge of "pov" is being thrown around like spaghetti at a wake. I ADMIT to having a pov; and also to accusing those who favour the 'status quo' of having a pov too. Which they manifestly have! For example; the majority 'vote' to accept option 'D' (no flag) is rejected because according one editor it is just a first step in an agenda to abolish the article on Northern Ireland. Clearly if we can't deal with the issues as presented but see perfectly reasonable claims/edits as part of some bigger agenda than ANYTHING can be questioned.
As my GOOD FAITH has been rubbished by several veteran contributors I will now take a ONE MONTH break from all issues relating to Irish naming disputes, including editing controversial articles, (bar Roads-related ones) in order to concentrate on what I feel I should be doing here. I will remain active and TRY to keep out of this - until 25th March 2007. Have a good time fighting folks! (If there is a VOTE on any of these issues I'll be back in a flash). Regards to all, and even to those who question my good faith - I don't question yours. ( Sarah777 00:23, 26 February 2007 (UTC))
Why do some articles on countries include a religion section and others not? Is this a matter of political correctness? More importantly, where is the section about Northern Ireland's religion? One of the main causes behind so much terrorism and "freedom - fighting" as the IRA would call it has occured is due to historical discrimination of Catholics in favor of Anglicans and to this day, Protestants and Catholics do not get along very well today. And no, I don't need to cite that fact, unless you've put a cardboard box on your heads every time BBC news came on from 1990's - 2000's . Tourskin 02:18, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Point of detail - "Anglicans" should read Protestant. Only a minority of protestants are "Anglican", and these days "Anglicans" [Church of Ireland] are usually associated with the liberal wing of Unionism .
Why is there no mention whatsoever in this article that Northern Ireland has its own legal system - Northern Ireland law - which is separate from English law (also applicable in Wales) or Scots law? I would have thought that that was rather fundamental information. -- Mais oui! 11:06, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Why would the mural be listed as in 'Derry' when the city itself (where the mural is located) is 'officially' and 'really' Londonderry? Bo 18:07, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
I've opened a straw poll on support for a change to the title of the Republic of Ireland article and related articles. -- sony-youth talk 21:28, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
I think it would be better to write
If we must use words like "claiming" (or portrayed) then I'd be happy with either version. What is important is that not just one side are represented as "claiming" anything unless the other is - the word may well be accurate but is definitely pejorative. ( Sarah777 01:29, 24 March 2007 (UTC))
Primarily political I would say; the issue of Unionist monopoly of power, discrimination in allocating jobs and houses etcetera. And the issue of British backing of the Unionist regime in Stormont which Nationalists wanted abolished. "Nationalists happen to be of one sect and Unionists of the other, but the conflict is primarily an ethnic one." Nationalism is a political position, not a ethnicity. Ditto Unionism. This was a political dispute, between Nationalists who were mainly Catholic and Unionists plus the British Government (who are mainly Protestant) on the other side. ( Sarah777 18:12, 24 March 2007 (UTC))
I heard on the news right now, that tonight, Great Britain will offically not rule Northen Ireleand any more. Any have any sources on that? → Aza Toth 06:45, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Great Britain never ruled Northern Ireland to begin with AzaToth. -- Mal 20:20, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello fellow editors. A straw poll has opened today (27th March 2007) regarding the use of flags on the United Kingdom place infoboxes. There are several potential options to use, and would like as many contrubutors to vote on which we should decide upon. The straw poll is found here. If joining the debate, please keep a cool head and remain civil. We look forward to seeing you there. Jhamez84 11:39, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Well, that's what the Unionist community wants, isn't it?! ( Sarah777 08:10, 28 March 2007 (UTC))
Someone replaced the entire NI article with the single word "poops"; that was reverted and then user User:Psyche825 reverted the whole article back to "poops" - 'using popups':
(Revert to revision 118424627 dated 2007-03-28 02:25:14 by 75.67.23.163 using popups)
How does this happen? ( Sarah777 02:57, 28 March 2007 (UTC))
The main article is now locked. Should we seek mediation or arbitration to resolve the dispute? Or is this an indication that one has already been chosen?-- ZincBelief 14:30, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
If you check the article history you'll see the flag/crest in the infobox for over a year. Maybe earlier, I haven't checked that far back. I'm not refusing to accept anything, no consensus, agreement or decision has been reached padraig. Stu ’Bout ye! 15:00, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Arbcom's not going to resolve a content dispute for you. While it might hand out some suspensions and probations for general jackassery perpetrated during the dispute, they won't hand down a decision on which flag should go there. That's left up to the editors who actually work on the page. Mediation's a better bet. ShaleZero 16:50, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
There is a dispute about whether or not the infobox should contain a flag.16:00, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Comment If there is no current flag, then no.-- Zleitzen (talk) 16:56, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
"brave heroes "? - surely you mean terrorists or are you just spouting a POV ?
If there is no flag for NI then there is no flag for NI. If there was one 35 years ago then that's when it was - 35 years ago. Normally this would mean that NI "simply has no flag" and so leaving it out of the infobox would be most appropriate. However, given the circumstances of the last 35 years, its hardly the case that NI "simply has no flag" - "simply" is a problem just for a start. It had a flag, the reasons why that flag is no longer official are legion, but like all other constituents in the UK, NI (in theory) can, and should, bear a flag, and it will probably again in time. Until then, the Ulster banner should be used in the infobox as a "former" flag, with specific dates, and the coat of arm displayed similarly. This is simply neutral and factual. However, to claim that the Ulster banner is currently the flag of NI would not be so.
Much more clear is that the Union Flag is not a flag of NI, it is the flag of the UK - to display it in the infobox as the flag of NI is unfactual and misleading. The union flag simply and plainly does not represent NI, it represents the state that NI is a constituent member of. -- sony-youth talk 22:18, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Comment Placing the flag in the infobox would be misleading in that other similar articles have current flags in the infobox. If, however, the flag has historical interest I would suggest it could be included elsewhere in the article as a former flag in the interest of compromise. Inseeisyou 12:58, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Comment: If the flag stopped being official in 1972, then it should not appear in the infobox, but it should appear in a section. Current treatment of flags seems OK as it is now. Randroide 12:50, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Comment: If the Union Banner is not an official flag any longer, don't use it in the infobox; if no official flag exists, don't use one at all. We note that the Union Jack is in fact the official overarching flag of the sovereign entity, yet like the Union Banner itself is a political PoV statement to many, so don't use it either, per WP:NPOV. Ergo use no flag, unless/until such time as N.I. has its own official flag again. The U.B. has historical significance, so use it in the article, clearly captioned as to its applicability, and link to Flag of Northern Ireland for further explanation with {{ main}} (or otherwise). Pretty simple really. U.B. should not be used in icon form, e.g. in general lists/tables relating to countries, nor in individuals' infoboxes, for PoV reasons. But because it does have official saction for sporting purposes among sport governing bodies, ranging from football to snooker, and there is no cited evidence that this usage is perceived as a political statement (unlike general civic usage which Flag of Northern Ireland and reliable external sources say is a uniformly Unionist partisan message), it is appropriate to use the U.B. icon in tables and lists of sport stats/results (but not in players' infoboxes, since its use is only appropriate for their professional role as sportspeople representing N.I., not as a symbol for them as people in general, where it implies Unionism for many readers, an implication that in many cases will be factually incorrect.) The "Nationality" line of their infobox should simply read "[[Northern Ireland|Northern Irish]]", with no flag icon. — SMcCandlish [ talk] [ cont ‹(-¿-)› 00:15, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Wouldn't it be obvious to have the Union Flag in the flag space and above it saying Northern Ireland no longer has a flag of its own but is covered by the Union Flag as part of the UK, which is actually closest to the truth and has no bias.
Nope. Not consistent with the consensus or with the other UK countries. Someone said the new Assembly (incoming, hopefully) has a flag. If so, why not use that? ( Sarah777 20:02, 6 April 2007 (UTC))
All the other countries in the UK have a flag, it is inconsistant for Wiki and the UK for not have a flag in the Info box. The Union Flag should be used. -- Cka4004 21:30, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
The Union Flag is actually the flag which should be used because it's the only flag Northern Ireland has used since the 70s and is the only flag Northern Ireland uses to this day. Wikipedia can't use a predicted flag as it's part of Wiki policy that Wikipedia only displays what is fact at present, and the fact is at present that Northern Ireland no longer has a Home Country flag but still uses the Union Flag as being part of the UK. The Assembly logo is only a proposed logo and isn't even a flag. It seems very odd not having a flag as is more inconsistant not having a flag and would be more consistant using the Union Flag. As for consensus it's used as a tool to try to stop people changing the article away from how someone else wanted it so when someone changes something which seems wrong the person who liked it how it was before will tell them no you can't because you don't have consensus. If there are enough like minded editors trying to reach a consensus on a page they could agree on something which is completely wrong like that Northern Ireland is really governed by Dolphins, putting consensus between editors over what is actually fact is one of the major well known faults of Wikipedia. It seems to me and to many others that some people such as Sarah777 who hold pro-Nationalist views won't abide by the WP:NPOV because they won't accept anything less than making Northern Ireland seem like a shared sovereignty province between the UK and Republic of Ireland and so can't really be reasoned with nor will they ever completely abide by Wiki policies nor ever take a truely neutral POV and when they don't get their way they'll just find a sympathetic Administrator to protect the page with their edits in effect. In all it's almost impossible to keep this article just displaying the facts because there are too many Nationalists trying to make it look like Northern Ireland is in some way a part of the Republic of Ireland and it's high time we who just want the facts being told took this article back. 88.109.10.175 22:21, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Also on the stupid idea of using the EU flag instead I mean what is that? That's a ridiculous idea dreamt up as another way of desperately keeping the Union Flag off this article. I think you'll find Northern Ireland is more a part of the UK than the EU. This article is in serious risk of been seen as plain stupid in that it gets to a point where the article is just not in touch with reality anymore. 88.109.10.175 22:25, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Sarah, in a choice between using the Ulster Banner and not using the Ulster Banner, not using the Ulster Banner is not a compromise - at least no moreso than keeping the flag with the addition of a notice below stating it is no longer official, which I believe was there until the recent edit war. Also, our anonymous friend above did not tell you you were stupid, he said you had a stupid idea re the EU flag. While he's not far off the money, although disingenuous might been a better term than stupid. You may have been being sincere with the Assembly "flag" but the Assembly does not have a flag, just a corporate logo. There's a world of difference. beano 23:30, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Pages like Guadeloupe, Martinique or Saint-Pierre-et-Miquelon have unofficial flags as well as flags that can best be described as corresponding to a legislative or executive body, since they are described as "region flags", and "region" is simply a very prosaic administrative term. Using the Assembly logo seems like a good idea, as it's as close as you can come to something official. But I think the Ulster Banner, since it is still used to represent Northern Ireland in sports, at least, should also be included. (This is important since foreigners unfamiliar with the flag are likely to encounter it in this context.) I suppose a good caption for that flag would be Official flag (1953-1972) with a footnote still sometimes used unofficially especially in sport and in Unionist communities. I don't think the Union Flag is a good idea, since that would be inflammatory for a part of the Northern Ireland population, to a much greater extent, I would presume, than the Ulster Banner. I would like to point out that the fact that the Union Flag is flown on some official occasions is not a conclusive argument that it should be included, since it appears to be used officially solely as a sort of symbol of royal authority or central government authority. In Canada, the Union Flag is officially the "Royal Flag" and has some limited uses in connection with the monarchy and also on occasions honouring past military action by Canada, since Canada fought under that flag as late as the Second World War, with it technically being considered a symbol of Canada rather than the UK. Of course, these uncommon official uses of the Royal Flag do not mean that it is ordinarily seen as a symbol of Canada. Like Northern Ireland, Canada was divided on the use of a symbol connected with Britain, and the Union Flag has seldom been seen since the mid-60s. In any case, I think appropriate capions can make it clear, if necessary, what the status of the various flags is. Joeldl 08:33, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
I think everyone can agree that there is no official flag. If everyone agrees to this, then the info box should reflect it, i.e. No Official Flag. Dose Wikipedia policies dictate that a flag has to be inserted, were no official flag exists? I would not think so. The article itself will explain the reason for this. Regards -- Domer48 18:54, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't think anyone is denying that the Ulster Banner is used by groups and individuals to represent Northern Ireland, and as such whether the IFA use it or not is irrelevant. It would only be relevant to the debate if some were contending that the Ulster Banner is never used by anyone, anywhere, ever. I see enough mindless thugs putting it up on lampposts at this time of year to know that it is still used by many. The IFA is not Wikipedia, and vice versa. The IFA do not have to follow Wikipedia rules and guidelines, and so whether they use the flag or not is a complete non sequitur. Martin 17:16, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Surely it's relevant when considering the argument that while the flag is not official, it is used to represent Northern Ireland (in most of the few sports where Northern Ireland is distinctly represented) and is therefore a de facto and/or unofficial flag. beano 18:51, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
It is very clear that the article should not be unblocked as it will lead to an immediate resumption of an edit war. We really must look for a Third Way (as the British and NI Prime Minister would say!). I suggest (1) The Assembly logo; (2) failing agreement to that the EU flag, which I think no reasonable person can object to. Look at it - beautiful, is it not? ( Sarah777 21:37, 7 April 2007 (UTC))
Sarah777, the EU Flag is not a option.-- padraig3uk 21:50, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
And why not?? ( Sarah777 22:00, 7 April 2007 (UTC))
And why is either the EU or UN flag a better choice than the Union Flag? Martin 00:27, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
In country articles, the location map of this David Liuzzo design obtains a map caption (here simplified):
Location of X (orange)
on the
European continent (white) — [Legend]
or
Location of X (orange)
- on the
European continent (camel and white)
- in the
European Union (camel) — [Legend]
The colours of the areas are further explained on a linked [Legend], which is specific for the EU (or maps without the 'camel' colour the Legend preserves for it) and cannot serve for Northern Ireland. In this case, the normal parameters for "map_caption" in the infobox, would not render a proper result either. I prepared a map_caption that exactly follows the syntax otherwise produced by the template, it renders this text when actually passed to the Infobox of the Northern Ireland article:
the
United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern Ireland (camel and orange respectively),
and of this
UK on the
European continent (white)
In case this is found acceptable, copy [from this read-out screen, not from edit mode] this next part and paste it into the article in edit mode (when not protected) underneath the line: |image_map = Europe location N-IRL.png
|map_caption = <div style="text-align:center;font-size:11px;line-height:1.15em;"><!-- --><span style="font-size:11px;">Location of <span style="font-size:2px;"> </span>[[Northern Ireland]] <!-- --><span style="font-size:2px;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"> </span></span>(<span style="font-size:9px;">orange</span>) <!-- -->in, officially,</span><p style="width:250px;font-size:11px;margin-top:0px;margin-bottom:0px;line-height:1.15em;">''the <!-- -->[[United Kingdom|United Kingdom of Great Britain and<br/>Northern Ireland]]'' <!-- --><span style="font-size:8px;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"> </span></span>(<span style="font-size:9px;">camel and <!-- -->orange respectively</span>),<br />and of this [[United Kingdom|UK]] on the [[Europe|European <!-- -->continent]] <span style="font-size:4px;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"> </span></span><!-- -->(<span style="font-size:9px;">white</span>)</p></div>
A simpeler "United Kingdom" would be possible, but here the official full name is more informative. Kind regards. — SomeHuman 8 Apr 2007 22:48 (UTC)
Why is the European Union not included on the "location map"? (
Sarah777
23:01, 8 April 2007 (UTC))
NI used to be described by the BBC and others as 'the province', ( although nationalists thought that it was only part of a province, namely 'Ulster'!)
Now we get the likes of the 'Nolan Show' on BBC Ulster using the tern 'country' to describe NI. We even have a debate over the location of a 'National(sic) Stadium'.
When will unionists ever grow up and come to terms with the fact that NI is neither a 'province' nor a 'country' but just a part of the island of Ireland? Big Ian mentioned our two countries when he recently shook hands with the 'Irish Prime Minister' (sic),,,but then maybe he was referring to the UK and Ireland! Lughlamhfhada 09:56, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Thats true, but as it is not physically joining the rest of the UK it is more appropriate to call it province, rather than country due to the complex nature of the UK's construction. -- Cka4004 20:09, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
( Sarah777 19:30, 11 April 2007 (UTC))
I am not trying to dispute NI's status as a country, but simply trying to explain why it is somtimes known as the province in relation to the rest of the UK due to its status of being located on the Island of Ireland and not on the Island of Britain along side the other countries of the UK. Politically when I say Ireland I do of course mean Republic of Ireland. But culturally and in sport I refer to Ireland as one land, or island. -- Cka4004 19:46, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
"the UK is a country, but "Ireland" is merely an island. - Mal." So, you are saying that you didn't actually mean what you wrote? That style of writing would indeed cause comprehension difficulties! ( Sarah777 23:24, 11 April 2007 (UTC))
I thought/hoped that the standard of debate over this issue would be thought provoking ...at least past 11+ standard, but sadly the apologists for unionism have yet again failed to deliver.
If you were born in Ireland you are Irish by nationality ( natare = to be born). You may claim Irish or British Citizenship ( or even both) of course ( see the Belfast Agreement) but this still leaves you Irish.
If Ireland is your country of birth ( north, south, east and west of Ireland) then it matters little whether you saw the first light of day north or south of the border.
Describing Northern Ireland as a country is to misuse the term, given that there is no such thing as a Northern Ireland 'nationality'. ( There is no Armagh nationality either of course!)
The fact that northern protestant unionists are Irish of course does not diminish their rights to claim British Citizenship nor should it diminish their loyality to the Crown.
What seems to me to be a pointless debate is the harping on an on ad nauseam about a flag for Norhtern Ireland or other trappings of 'nationhood', when the dogs in the street all know that this the stuff of dunderheads.
Big Ian in his speech in Dublin recently alluded to his Ulsterness and his Irishness. so maybe this bogeyman will soon be laid finally to rest! Lughlamhfhada 21:06, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
10:32, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Thats true, but as it is not physically joining the rest of the UK it is more appropriate to call it province, rather than country due to the complex nature of the UK's construction. -- Cka4004 20:09, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
( Sarah777 19:30, 11 April 2007 (UTC))
I am not trying to dispute NI's status as a country, but simply trying to explain why it is somtimes known as the province in relation to the rest of the UK due to its status of being located on the Island of Ireland and not on the Island of Britain along side the other countries of the UK. Politically when I say Ireland I do of course mean Republic of Ireland. But culturally and in sport I refer to Ireland as one land, or island. -- Cka4004 19:46, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
"the UK is a country, but "Ireland" is merely an island. - Mal." So, you are saying that you didn't actually mean what you wrote? That style of writing would indeed cause comprehension difficulties! ( Sarah777 23:24, 11 April 2007 (UTC))
I thought/hoped that the standard of debate over this issue would be thought provoking ...at least past 11+ standard, but sadly the apologists for unionism have yet again failed to deliver.
If you were born in Ireland you are Irish by nationality ( natare = to be born). You may claim Irish or British Citizenship ( or even both) of course ( see the Belfast Agreement) but this still leaves you Irish.
If Ireland is your country of birth ( north, south, east and west of Ireland) then it matters little whether you saw the first light of day north or south of the border.
Describing Northern Ireland as a country is to misuse the term, given that there is no such thing as a Northern Ireland 'nationality'. ( There is no Armagh nationality either of course!)
The fact that northern protestant unionists are Irish of course does not diminish their rights to claim British Citizenship nor should it diminish their loyality to the Crown.
What seems to me to be a pointless debate is the harping on an on ad nauseam about a flag for Norhtern Ireland or other trappings of 'nationhood', when the dogs in the street all know that this the stuff of dunderheads.
Big Ian in his speech in Dublin recently alluded to his Ulsterness and his Irishness. so maybe this bogeyman will soon be laid finally to rest! Lughlamhfhada 21:06, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, Beano should re-read my article, for he evidently is confused. It was Big Ian who said 'our two countries' not me! As regards my having a 'fundamental lack of understanding of the problem', maybe Beano will come back to debate this observation and what he terms the 'problem'?
Ireland has for a long time been partitioned ( see other examples like Cyprus or Kashmir). We therefore live under seperate jurisdictions or states, one being the UK and the other Ireland ( or the 'Republic of Ireland' as it is described). The six counties of Northern ireland which remain in the UK are of course still part of Ireland and the people who were born, lived or died there, are Irish by nationality and have a right to claim Irish, British ( or both) citizenship.( see Belfast Agreement).
They can't claim English or Scottish nationality because they were not born in these countries, nor can you claim English or Scottish citizenship because no such thing exists ( unfortunately!).
Nationality involves many things but in order to advance this debate I would like to raise the question of the use ( or misuse) of the term 'mainland'.
The 'Isle of Wight' is an English island and county, off the southern English coast, to the south of the county of Hampshire.' It is taken for granted that if one is born in the 'Isle of Wight' that England is the your 'mainland'. Of course England has become part of a larger political entity, the UK and the EU. We could envisage someone born on this island referring to either of these larger entities as 'the mainland', but I would suggest that this is improbable.
if you visit 'Rathlin island' you will notice that the islanders refer to the island of Ireland as the mainland. Go down to the harbour and ask a boatman to bring you to the mainland and you will be brought to north Antrim not the west of Scotland to to mainland Britain( sic). It is therefore rediculous, if somewhat amusing, to hear some presumably insecure or confused unionist referring to Great Britain as the 'mainland' instead of his own country, 'Ireland'. Lughlamhfhada 11:10, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Someone has screwed up this section. Lots of repetition of the cut'n'paste sort. Lughlamhfhada - you are the prime suspect! "The Mainland", from a Dublin perspective - if it isn't where we are already are then it's that place where Paris and Brussels are located. ( Sarah777 15:50, 22 April 2007 (UTC))
What's more, this section appears to be entirely a political troll. What constructive points relevant to the article are actually mentioned here? I don't see the point of it. -- ZincBelief 16:01, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Indeed, what is the point of anything? But is this the place to engage in philosophical debate? Surely we should stick to the subject, which is....Our Wee Country. And 'troll' is such negative word, Zinc. ( Sarah777 16:13, 22 April 2007 (UTC))
{{ Editprotected}}
This article contains incorrect and misleading information. In its infobox at the top of the article, it is claimed that Northern Ireland is "Currently without a National Flag". In actuality, the country does have a flag (as shown on the right), so this statement is in error. Equally, the countries England, Scotland and Wales can be said to currently be without a national flag. All countries however, also share the national flag known as the Union Jack. This renders the current statement in the infobox completely inaccurate and, in fact, a nonsense.
The protection template states: "This page is currently protected from editing until disputes have been resolved. Protection is not an endorsement of the current version (protection log)." However, clearly the current setup is completely in support of the few who have a particular political agenda (as opposed to respecting the de facto situation), and the previous edit protection states also supported this particular point of view. No edit protection freezes I have witnessed have frozen the article the way it had stood for the longest uninterrupted period - that the Flag of Northern Ireland was included in the infobox.
Further, the disputed issue was in regard to the Flag of Northern Ireland, but it appears that someone has also removed the coat of arms, which had not been in dispute.
Either some other edit should be made which presents a correct picture regarding the issue, as opposed to a completely false suggestion, or the flag of Northern Ireland that had been part of the article for the longest time (barring a couple of interruptions) should be restored forthwith.
It is a ridiculous state of affairs that an encyclopedia presents incorrect information to its readers. -- Mal 19:37, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
However Padraig, the Ulster Banner is the best known symbol as a flag to represent NI at present, and is seen across hundreds of Wiki pages as a symbol to show a person from Northern Ireland's nationality, or the location of a number of different artifacts and places of world stature. such as on the page of [[Ikea ]] in their list of stores section. -- Cka4004 19:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Agree (with edit request): The page should at least be edited to remove <big>[[Northern Ireland flags issue|Currently without a National Flag]]</big>
from the infobox's native_name
field. The flag field can just be left blank as it is now, but the phrase placed where it is is clearly a POV edit (why else the <big>
tag? why put it in the native_name
field?) and is the basis of one side of the current debate. Its presence there is likely to cause offence/more trouble/less likelihood of actually resolving this spat. Aside from that it also looks ugly and is unnecessary. --
sony-youth
talk
21:07, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
<tr><td colspan="3" style="line-height:1.2em; text-align:center;"><big>[[Northern Ireland flags issue|Currently without a National Flag]]</big></td></tr>
- disgraceful edit, whoever made it. --
sony-youth
talk
21:11, 11 April 2007 (UTC)There does not seem to be clear consensus to make the edit. I have disabled the tag. If consensus does develop, please feel free to add the tag again. CMummert · talk 01:06, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
{{
editprotected}}
OK, my point for agreeing with the edit request seems to have been lost in the issue of restoring the flag or not. As a new edit request, I don't want to restore the flag, but to make an edit to remove <tr><td colspan="3" style="line-height:1.2em; text-align:center;"><big>[[Northern Ireland flags issue|Currently without a National Flag]]</big></td></tr>
from the infobox's native_name
field. This is the only edit I wish to make and should be seen as a seperate issue as to whether or not there should be a flag/coat of arms in the infobox. The code is an artificial insertion to the infobox, looks ugly and is unnecessary whether it is true or not. --
sony-youth
talk
08:59, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Rather than making statements directed towards an admin, you will have to discuss the issue with the other involved editors to find any consensus. Since this text seems to be part of the dispute for which the page was protected, I don't believe it would be appropriate to change it until the dispute is resolved. This is not an endorsement of the current content; it's a general policy to minimize the amount of editing done to protected pages. CMummert · talk 13:32, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
<BIG>
tag) in the infobox. Could we just have it back to how it was at the time of being protected? --
sony-youth
talk
13:41, 12 April 2007 (UTC)Now that the issue above is sorted can we now find a solution, so that we can have the article un-protected and we can get on with improving the article.-- padraig3uk 15:35, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
A possible short term fix may be
This approach does have flaws (eg removing the template), however the flags issue is horrendious and could last for years, while the rest of the article stagnates. It does require people to have a bit of sense(sic) and realise that the protected template is not to be altered. 86.12.249.63 17:19, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Anthem:
God Save the Queen Londonderry Air ( de facto) | |
![]() Location of Northern Ireland/Archive 5 (orange) – in
Europe (tan & white) | |
Capital and largest city |
Belfast 54°35.456′N 5°50.4′W / 54.590933°N 5.8400°W |
Official languages | English ( de facto), Irish, Ulster Scots3 |
Government | Constitutional monarchy |
•
Queen | Queen Elizabeth II |
Tony Blair MP | |
office suspended | |
office suspended | |
Peter Hain MP | |
Establishment | |
1920 | |
Area | |
• Total | 13,843 km2 (5,345 sq mi) |
Population | |
• 2004 estimate | 1,710,300 |
• 2001 census | 1,685,267 |
• Density | 122/km2 (316.0/sq mi) |
GDP ( PPP) | 2002 estimate |
• Total | US$33.2 billion |
• Per capita | US$19,603 |
Currency | Pound sterling ( GBP) |
Time zone | UTC0 (GMT) |
• Summer (
DST) | UTC+1 (BST) |
Calling code | 445 |
ISO 3166 code | GB-NIR |
Internet TLD | .uk4 |
|
I am who suggested to User:Mysid change the template. Someone have created a Infobox only for Northern Ireland and it was redundant. I only changed from Template:Infobox UK N-Ireland to a general country Template:Infobox Country, without change nothing in content, as I made in others UK constituent countries ( England, Wales and Scotland). So, I suggest to modify the Infobox here and in the future request to admin move to the article. Guilherme Paula 00:03, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Just a question - the flag and arms were granted to the Government of NI, not to NI itself, correct? -- sony-youth talk 19:33, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Sony-youth, that is correct the flag ceased to be offical when the government was disolved, the coat of arms issue is different as they are in limbo status, and could be brought be back into offical use if a future NI government requested it.-- padraig3uk 20:03, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
If their is no national flag, the info box should reflect this. Regards--
Domer48
19:41, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
The Ascension Island has no flag because it simply has no national flag, that is all, just like Northern Ireland, and in its place the flag of the Union of the UK is used, just like in Northern Ireland. -- Cka4004 15:33, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
I presume that the use of this emblem in Wiki projects should be stopped, as there is in fact no flag representing NI? ( Sarah777 15:35, 15 April 2007 (UTC))
By clicking on a map of NI, there are infact nearly 1000 or more pages in wiki that use the Ulster banner, as a flag to represent Northern Ireland, as a map of Northern Ireland has no official status at all I have changed some to a mini flag of the Union jack and simply writing Northern Ireland, UK. in replacement, as the Union Jack is the only offical flag for Northern Ireland. By the way 88.111.203.121 is me, I just hadn't logged on by Accident. However much people dislike it, until a replacement the Ulster Banner will be the best known symbol of Northern Ireland. This would appear to be reflected within Wiki as they use it all the time across so many pages. -- Cka4004 15:52, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
{{editprotected}} Please fix this page it look terrible cant it just be protected ?? ( Gnevin 22:07, 3 May 2007 (UTC))
I doubt this is a "non-political" alternative to the clear majority supporting "no flag", but if accepted it would of course mean that in the example I have supplied above the Ulster Banner would need to be replaced by the Union Jack. ( Sarah777 15:40, 15 April 2007 (UTC))
NIShape.gif
Anthem:
God Save the Queen Londonderry Air ( de facto) | |
![]() Location of Northern Ireland/Archive 5 (orange) – in
Europe (tan & white) | |
Capital and largest city |
Belfast 54°35.456′N 5°50.4′W / 54.590933°N 5.8400°W |
Official languages | English ( de facto), Irish, Ulster Scots3 |
Government | Constitutional monarchy |
•
Queen | Queen Elizabeth II |
Tony Blair MP | |
office suspended | |
office suspended | |
Peter Hain MP | |
Establishment | |
1920 | |
Area | |
• Total | 13,843 km2 (5,345 sq mi) |
Population | |
• 2004 estimate | 1,710,300 |
• 2001 census | 1,685,267 |
• Density | 122/km2 (316.0/sq mi) |
GDP ( PPP) | 2002 estimate |
• Total | US$33.2 billion |
• Per capita | US$19,603 |
Currency | Pound sterling ( GBP) |
Time zone | UTC0 (GMT) |
• Summer (
DST) | UTC+1 (BST) |
Calling code | 445 |
ISO 3166 code | GB-NIR |
Internet TLD | .uk4 |
|
Anthem:
God Save the Queen Londonderry Air ( de facto) | |
![]() Location of Northern Ireland/Archive 5 (orange) – in
Europe (tan & white) | |
Capital and largest city |
Belfast 54°35.456′N 5°50.4′W / 54.590933°N 5.8400°W |
Official languages | English ( de facto), Irish, Ulster Scots3 |
Government | Constitutional monarchy |
•
Queen | Queen Elizabeth II |
Tony Blair MP | |
office suspended | |
office suspended | |
Peter Hain MP | |
Establishment | |
1920 | |
Area | |
• Total | 13,843 km2 (5,345 sq mi) |
Population | |
• 2004 estimate | 1,710,300 |
• 2001 census | 1,685,267 |
• Density | 122/km2 (316.0/sq mi) |
GDP ( PPP) | 2002 estimate |
• Total | US$33.2 billion |
• Per capita | US$19,603 |
Currency | Pound sterling ( GBP) |
Time zone | UTC0 (GMT) |
• Summer (
DST) | UTC+1 (BST) |
Calling code | 445 |
ISO 3166 code | GB-NIR |
Internet TLD | .uk4 |
|
Anthem:
God Save the Queen Londonderry Air ( de facto) | |
![]() Location of Northern Ireland/Archive 5 (orange) – in
Europe (tan & white) | |
Capital and largest city |
Belfast 54°35.456′N 5°50.4′W / 54.590933°N 5.8400°W |
Official languages | English ( de facto), Irish, Ulster Scots3 |
Government | Constitutional monarchy |
•
Queen | Queen Elizabeth II |
Tony Blair MP | |
office suspended | |
office suspended | |
Peter Hain MP | |
Establishment | |
1920 | |
Area | |
• Total | 13,843 km2 (5,345 sq mi) |
Population | |
• 2004 estimate | 1,710,300 |
• 2001 census | 1,685,267 |
• Density | 122/km2 (316.0/sq mi) |
GDP ( PPP) | 2002 estimate |
• Total | US$33.2 billion |
• Per capita | US$19,603 |
Currency | Pound sterling ( GBP) |
Time zone | UTC0 (GMT) |
• Summer (
DST) | UTC+1 (BST) |
Calling code | 445 |
ISO 3166 code | GB-NIR |
Internet TLD | .uk4 |
|
Anthem:
God Save the Queen Londonderry Air ( de facto) | |
![]() Location of Northern Ireland/Archive 5 (orange) – in
Europe (tan & white) | |
Capital and largest city |
Belfast 54°35.456′N 5°50.4′W / 54.590933°N 5.8400°W |
Official languages | English ( de facto), Irish, Ulster Scots3 |
Government | Constitutional monarchy |
•
Queen | Queen Elizabeth II |
Tony Blair MP | |
office suspended | |
office suspended | |
Peter Hain MP | |
Establishment | |
1920 | |
Area | |
• Total | 13,843 km2 (5,345 sq mi) |
Population | |
• 2004 estimate | 1,710,300 |
• 2001 census | 1,685,267 |
• Density | 122/km2 (316.0/sq mi) |
GDP ( PPP) | 2002 estimate |
• Total | US$33.2 billion |
• Per capita | US$19,603 |
Currency | Pound sterling ( GBP) |
Time zone | UTC0 (GMT) |
• Summer (
DST) | UTC+1 (BST) |
Calling code | 445 |
ISO 3166 code | GB-NIR |
Internet TLD | .uk4 |
|
As has been pointed out before the Union Banner represents England, Scotland, Wales and N Ireland as one Union, it dosent present then as individual parts.-- padraig3uk 15:51, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Sarah, I understand what your saying, but we have been over this already. I have removed the second infobox from here it is not necessary for this discussion.-- padraig3uk 17:08, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
I am sorry Paidrag, but the substance of this part of the article which I started requires the provision of a sample infobox to show my opinion on the situation, which everyone has their right to do. -- Cka4004 18:12, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
In response to Vintagekits, Northern Ireland is not a county or city, and the Union Jack is the only official flag for the country, it has priority as the flag of the UK, but as NI has no national flag the Union Jack is the only official flag for Northern Ireland, as stated in the Belfast Agreement. For the info box to say NI has no flag is not true, especially when the rest of Wikipedia has been using and continues to use the Ulster Banner as a flag for Northern Ireland on almost 1000 different pages. -- Cka4004 18:16, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Quoting Guilherme Paula from above in sub heading sugesting new info box. ' So, I suggest to modify the Infobox here and in the future request to admin move to the article. Guilherme Paula 00:03, 13 April 2007 (UTC)' -- Cka4004 18:19, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Cka4004, the reason why
Guilherme Paula provided the code for the infobox is because of this
Talk:Northern_Ireland#Short_term_fix discussion. It wasn't so that we could restart the whole discussion again fron last October, the concencus is to remove all flags from the infobox, the code was provided so that we could make it into a template and then request an admin to protect that template and place it on the article so that the article itself can be unprotected so that we can edit it.--
padraig3uk
19:22, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Well why didnt Guilherme say that then? as when I read it, it is clear that the template is so we can edit it and then ask admin to upload our edited version if agreed upon to the main page. -- Cka4004 19:36, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
The intended discussion here is to see if people are happy with the wording about the flag or wether we should remove the wording.-- padraig3uk 19:45, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
For the several people who still care enough to follow this debate, for reference it might be useful to look at the Kosovo infobox which has no official flag. 86.156.2.227 22:27, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Padraig, this page is for discussion about any issue relating to the Northern Ireland page, and anyone can write anything they want about that issue. I have placed an alternative infobox to the one currently on the NI page, and will be contacting Admin shortly, in acordance with what Guilherme said in their above article, on this alternative infobox, showing the Official flag of Northern Ireland, not an Infobox which has no flag and is derogitory to the article and misleading to the public. -- Cka4004 22:32, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
The Kosovo page is interesting however has nothing todo with the UK or her sister countries. -- Cka4004 22:32, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
How about the other info box for an alternative? the NI outline looks well. -- Cka4004 22:53, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Now that I have seen how well the small 6 counties of Northern Ireland looks on the pages I have seen, I think it would be a suitable logo for NI across Wikipedia and in the Infobox of the Northern Ireland page. -- Cka4004 23:01, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Agree. The map looks good, and is clearly recognisable in both the Country Infobox and as the small symbol for NI in other articles. being it looks so well and appears so neutral I assume everybody on both sides will ridicule the idea!! I support the proposal to use the map. In fact the Assembly should probably adopt it as the new flag; set in an orange background! ( Sarah777 00:06, 16 April 2007 (UTC))
I don't think the image is trying to portray NI as an island, just it is a very nice image and looks very well when used as a small icon to represent NI across all pages in Wiki and in the infobox of the NI page. Gaillimh people in NI are not automatically Irish Citizens, they are however automatically British on the day their birth cirtificate is signed, as a child born in any other part of the UK. It is Irish citizenship that is optional, and people may chose to take it up or maybe chose both as many do, to enjoy the benifits of British Nationality while expressing a wish to enjoy Irish Citizenship as well .-- Cka4004 14:42, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I also support the proposal to use the green NI map as the logo for Northern Ireland on Wikipedia in the info box and as a logo in place of a flag for Northern Ireland to identify it from the other home nations. --
Cka4004
14:46, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I like the map, and have a suggestion for the "island" problem - could you have two little black line showing tiny continuations of the coastline where it extends beyond NI's borders on both sides? Just to show this is not an island, but not obtrusive to show the whole of the island of Ireland (if that's the right expression). I only comment as I failed to recognise what it was at a first glance and thought it needed a little pointer that it wasn't an island, if you see what I mean. Just a suggestion. LeeG 22:08, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
OK, this may hurt sensitivities on all sides, but personally I don't see any way for the editors contributing to page to resolve the flag/no flag infobox issue alone (i.e. reach a consensus). Trenches have been dug and in fairness its too tight an issue for people close to the matter to call for themselves. I'm of the opinion that there is a case for both sides, but I would not like to be the one to have to call it, nor am I willing to do contribute to the debate for one side or another. What I suggest is that the contributers here put the matter to an international "jury" and put it to a full Request for Comment. Both (or three? UB/UF/no flag) sides should be able to put their cases forward in a fair manner then allow neutral contributors to judge what they would do. -- sony-youth talk 18:17, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I had, perhaps wrongly, thought that the
was possibly going to be an option, as it is suitable instead of the UB as an identification of Northern Ireland on Wikipedia such as when placed in an Infobox, or a User box etc like this,
-- Cka4004 21:45, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I agree absolutely with
Cka4004; on purely aesthetic grounds the NI map looks good:
. It does not show any other part of the UK or any other part of Ireland; it reflects the 'no flaf' majority - heck it's green and vaguely shamrockish. If the NI Unionist folk are happy with it I really can't see any objections. Surely what we want here is COMPROMISE, not victory? (
Sarah777
22:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC))
The Ark poll states:
A plurality of the present-day population (40%) define themselves as Unionist, 22% as Nationalist and 35% define themselves as neither.
The survey was not an accurate analysis of the current views on Northern Ireland demographics relating to Nationalists & Unionists. The poll had a majority of 51% taking the poll who were Protestant, with only 37% who were catholic. To get a true and unbiased view on NI demographics, a poll should represent a 50/50 cut. The Ark poll, which is cited in the article gives a poor reflection of the actual true opinions on Northern Ireland demographics and shouldn't be used on the NI wiki page.If the poll was less biased, the result would be much closer. Previous Ark polls show bias towards Protestant populations as there has never been a Catholic majoritive or equality in an Ark polling, according to Ark's very own tech notes. Ark's survey notes -- Jobjobjob talk 20: 53:17, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
And while that is true, the population of Northern Ireland does not consist of 37% catholic/51% protestant. The count is closer to 44/53. And in the interest of this debate, the current issue revolves around catholics and protestants. And while I don't mind including the other groups, my point I was trying to highlight was that the poll was heavily in favour of the Protestant voice, while lessening the Catholic voice. It was not to neglect other groups. I think if you are going to state on a wiki entry a percentage of who claim unionism and nationalism, the survey should be more honest and not biased. Also, more information on the survey should of been released, as public opinion can change slightly from city to city. From example, If I was to conduct a survey in Derry which has a catholic majoritive, the outcome would be drastically different.
If we are going to specify public opinion, the statistics should be more widespread. I think for something as complex as the North should involve 10,000 people, with 2,000 from each major city with the percentage of the demographics of that said city being reflective in the poll. The current Ark survey is dishonest and should be removed from the wiki entry.-- Jobjobjob talk 21:44:00, 16 April 2007 (GMT)
I have already highlighted the inaccuracies. I have quoted it for the benefit of you in my initial entry. It states that 40% consider themselves Unionist, while 22% as nationalist. The survey conducted had a lower than average catholic count. In a survey that states who is and isn't a unionist or nationalist, the survey shoould be more honest in the percentage of catholics & protestants used for the survey. For example, I could survey 20 catholics from a city and 10 protestants - Would that give me an honest demographical stance for that city? Absolutely not. Which is what Ark's survey is doing.. The percentage of protestants compared to catholics used in the survey is not a true represenation of the percentage of protestants to catholics in the North, and thus isinaccurate and a dishonest estimate of the real demographics. .-- Jobjobjob talk 21: 57:00, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I have not. How is it bogus to ask for a fair percentage in the survey? If the catholic represenation in the poll is less than the true catholic representation of the North, then the true number of those claiming a specific demographic (notably nationalism) will be less than it's true result. The survey favours the protestant opinion by lessening the catholic voice, using a less-than-average catholic surveyees. There are two possible surveys that can be taken. A 50/50 survey to get an honest assessment of both individual group's opinions for statisitical purposes and a true demographical survey, with correct percentages in the catholic and protestant people surveyed. Jobjobjob 21:19, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I take it when people say 'North' they mean Northern Ireland??, also just because somone is a catholic it doesn't mean they are a Nationalist, and just because they are a Protestant doesn't mean they are a Unionist, the poll by Ark, impartially and randomly selects people from across the country, it just happens that the last poll had more protestants than catholics, the next one may have more catholics than protestants, however a 50/50 poll would not reflect a true analysis of the NI people as not everyone is Catholic or Protestant. Unless people are hand picked, which would spoil the legitimacy of the poll, then there will probably never be a purely equal % to that of say census data to the demographics and opinions of the people in any poll. -- Cka4004 21:43, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
"it just happens that the last poll had more protestants than catholics" - It just so happens that EVERY poll has had the catholic community outnumbered by protestants, always exceeding their demographical percentage. The reference backs up my claims. Not all protestants are unionist and not all catholics are nationalist - This is correct, but if we're going to get an honest evaluation of who's who - At least do an accurate poll instead of a protestant heavy poll. I reaffirm my original point and ask for that citation to be removed from the article as it is not an accurate demographical poll and shouldn't be treated as such. Jobjobjob 21:16, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Rather than seeking outside help, could we not agree (however imperfect) that this map is not a flag; that it neutrally represents NI without any reference to either the rest of the UK or Ireland - and adopt it as the NI symbol till (if) the Assembly come up with something different? Really is time to put this argument to bed! ( Sarah777 22:36, 16 April 2007 (UTC))
I dont think that image should be used in the Infobox on this article, it is fine on other templates, but not on the main Northern Ireland article, as Northern Ireland is not a Island on its own but part of Ireland and the image should reflect that, the infobox looks better without it.-- padraig3uk 22:48, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm not opposed to using the map image on the infobox on this page. I'm bored of this argument. My feelings on people claiming consensus where there is none, and the reasons why either the UB and UF should be used are clear. But the "Northern Ireland has no current National Flag See: Northern Ireland flags issue" text should be removed from the infobox. If a newcomer looks at the article they'll wonder why it is there. As Beano says, using the map image on other infoboxes looks stupid. We need another alternative for those. Also, removing the Ulster Banner from Wikipedia entirely isn't an option - there are some places that its use is appropriate. Stu ’Bout ye! 08:24, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I agree with Trugster's wording - "Northern Ireland has no official flag (see Northern Ireland flags issue)". Stu ’Bout ye! 16:02, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Shouldn't that wording be "Northern Ireland has no official regional flag - see:
Northern Ireland flags issue" , now how about this image as an alternative.--
padraig3uk
16:18, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
I think everyone agreed to
, with yourself being the exception. --
Cka4004
19:41, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Padraig, it will cause aggro because it shows NI in Ireland but not in the UK. Also, the green map looks like an emblem rather than just a map - which is the point surely? (And it looks much better; appearance is also important in a symbol to represent a group of people). ( Sarah777 21:10, 24 April 2007 (UTC))
Opposed. The green shape of Northern Ireland is not a flag. It doesn't compare to the flags of Scotland, England and Wales and, frankly, looks ridiculous in the proper flag's stead. The flag of Northern Ireland should not have been removed from the Northern Ireland article in the first place. The current infobox is completely inaccurate - it suggests that Northern Ireland doesn't have a flag! It does (see right). -- Mal 09:16, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
I have asked some questions regarding changes to Northern Ireland on the " Template:Irish states since 1171" template. They are posted on the talk page there. -- sony-youth talk 20:42, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Clarifier: I would certainly be opposed to the splitting of the main Northern Ireland article. To do so would be misleading and uninformative. The only thing I would support would be the creation of a new article about the 1921-72 NI state. Under no circumstances should the current NI article the abridged to facilitate this. Stu brings up a good point about the name. I think History of Northern Ireland (1921-72) is too borad, as it covers all history, but maybe I'm being too strict abou it. The name I suggested, however, could imply a difference in states between then and now - that should be avoided. -- sony-youth pléigh 08:59, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
No opposition to History of Northern Ireland (xxxx-xx), only to Northern Ireland (state, xx-xx) as the latter would be misleading. Stu ’Bout ye! 10:07, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
What's this Southern Ireland article about with
Southern Ireland
?? This "state" co-existed in the same space and time as the Irish Republic/Free State, did it? How does that work?!!(
Sarah777
21:20, 24 April 2007 (UTC))
So it was a state of mind rather than a state! Can we write an article on the sovereign state of Ruritania? I believe Groucho Marx was it's President sometime in the 1930s - seems to have rather more reality than "Southern Ireland"? ( Sarah777 22:53, 24 April 2007 (UTC))
When did it exist? And how could it co-exist in space and time with another state? ( Sarah777 10:36, 25 April 2007 (UTC))
Sarah if you read the article it will explain when it existed, the fact is it did exist and is part of Ireland history, even if it wasn't recognised by the majority of people elected to it, I have also split this discussion off from the template debate above.-- padraig3uk 11:26, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Sarah, take it to the Southern Ireland talk page. This page is for Northern Ireland. -- sony-youth pléigh 11:31, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Nope folks, read the article. It clearly didn't exist - any more than Ruritania did. Therein lies the solution perhaps. As explained, it is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for two different states to co-exist in the same space and time. Therefore all counter-arguments fall. Self-evidently. ( Sarah777 11:40, 25 April 2007 (UTC))
I'm proposing a redesign of the "Irish states template", you can see my proposal at the talk page there. Please let me know what you think, good, bad, or indifferent - and also suggestion to improve it. -- sony-youth pléigh 08:40, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
The civil rights movement of the 1960s was an earthquake in the history of Northern Ireland. It represented the end of the Stormont regime, it led unintentionally to the Troubles and it was part of a worldwide movement (blacks in the US, the Paris spring, the czech uprising ...). Apparently not important enough to get into wikipedia history of Northern Ireland! That makes the entire article a joke. And as for the discussion page : thousands of words about the flag and yet not one comment about the dreadful history section!!!
Pmurnion 13:01, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
{{ editprotected}}
I'd like to to change the First Minister and Deputy First Minister in the infobox to Ian Paisley and Martin McGuinness, respectively. They just took their pledges of office.
I think that either the page protection be removed or someone here hurry's up and updated the Assembly section, as we now have a First Minister along with a full working Assembly!
It's still protected!!! Whats going on???
Not done The page is no longer protected so any required changes can be made.
Adambro
14:42, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
{{ editprotected}}
The main article should be flagged with
![]() | This article documents a
current event. Information may change rapidly as the event progresses, and initial news reports may be
unreliable. The
latest updates to this article
may not reflect the most current information. (May 2007) |
and ideally included on the Wikipedia main page as a current event. Northern Ireland today formed a new power-sharing government, marking the large end to sectarian conflict that has affected Northern Ireland, Eire and Great Britain for 30 years.
Not done The page is no longer protected so any required changes can be made.
Adambro
14:42, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
I hope that this page will be updated asap as the Northern Ireland Assembly is up and running with a First Minister and Deputy First Minister.
The Rev. and Rt. Hon. Ian Paisley was made First Minister of Northern Ireland today. The Deputy First Minister is Martin McGuinneas.
As the legislative assembly is now up and running, it may be considered as well that the emblem of the Legislative Assembly of Northern Ireland might be used in the fact box as the emblem for northern Ireland. It is the only officially recognised logo apart from the Union Flag and Royal Coat of Arms. Image:Northern Ireland Assembly logo.png
This proposal makes little sense...but then most of the proposals made in this site are of a similar nature! The LOGO is that of the NI Assembly not that of Northern Ireland. Why not have the logo of the PSNI or maybe the NI Gay Rights Association? But then I would suggest that whichever you should choose that you ask them for permission! We wouldn't want to break any copyright laws would we! Lughlamhfhada 21:40, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Lughlamhfhada 19:43, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Dear Sarah, I'm confused! according to Sony-youth you think that my comments are 'disingenuous'. I thought that you gave your support to the idea 'that the emblem of the Legislative Assembly of Northern Ireland might be used in the fact box as the emblem for northern Ireland.', a proposal which I found to make 'little sense'.I said that it would make equal sense hijacking the logo of the PSNI or the NIGRA. All these LOGOS are there to represent the various organizations, no more and no less! A flag is used usually to represent a country and thus we have Wales represented by the Welsh Flag (depicting a dragon). Sony-youth is evidently not used to 'Ulster plain speaking'! I have expressed my exasperation at the (low) standard of debate and the lack of basic knowledge/education of some of the participants....but this is not to take away from the right of these participants to join in debate and to receive a proper hearing, rather is it a 'plea' to the people involved not to 'mouth off' unless they can back up their argument with sensible reasons or examples. We all carry baggage from our past and hopefully we can learn from one another, be tolerant, understanding and forgiving. If we can try harder to understand the views of others, maybe our own views will become more rounded and less confrontational. Lughlamhfhada 10:54, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
If, please God, the devolved Assembly works out OK, surely the British Army can withdraw, and the post of Secretary of State for Northern Ireland can be abolished? I accept that we might need to give things a year or two to settle down, but surely these two objectives are valid? Millbanks 22:01, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Doing research on natural history of Northern Ireland the first place I looked was here, only to find that there is quite literaly nothing. To see some articles added would be of great help.
Thanks
Try Ireland as the flora and fauna don't tend to worry about the border. If your research finds anything new, please add it and cite your sources. -- Red King 19:47, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
I have problems with the following statement; "Often the use of the Irish language in Northern Ireland has met with considerable suspicion from Unionists, who have associated it with the largely Catholic Republic of Ireland, and more recently, with the republican movement in Northern Ireland itself. Catholic areas of Belfast have road signs in Irish as they are in the Republic, viewed by some as a way to let Protestants know that they are not welcome". There are no references given by the author which would serve to back up these observations. I have a completely different view and feel that the writer of these less than fair comments is perhaps biased towards or ignorant of (or maybe both) the Gaelic language. Lughlamhfhada 19:00, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Due to some comments on the United Ireland page, I thought it may be of interest to reproduce the discussion here. Hope it dos'nt offend anyone too much! Fergananim 19:23, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Ireland was united in 1014 a.d. by Brian Boru, high king of Ireland.FACT.
The Gaels (or the Scotti as they were termed in the Middle Ages) did not consider themselves 'Irish' or 'just Irish, rather did they consider themselves as belonging to an ethnic group 'the Gaels'( 'Scotti' in the Latin language) who had a common language and history.( Ireland, the Isle of Mann and most of modern day Scotland was considered to be their patrimony. Ríocht na nGael or 'Kingdom of the Gael'.) It is interesting that Brian Boru [sic] is not referred to in the 'Book of Armagh' as the 'Ard Ri' – that is, High-King – but rather he is declared "Emperatus Scottorum," or "Emperor of the Scots." It was the English speaking sons of former Palesmen ( Wolf Tone etc) who latched on to the 'United Ireland' bandwagon. This phenomenon was to be expected, given the earlier developments, notably in France regarding republicanism.
That modern nationalism should concentrate on the island of Ireland to the exclusion of the wider Gaeldom is a reflection of the decline of the Gaelic language and weak political influence exerted by Gaelic speaking people in our society. Eog1916 09:08, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Could someone who knows the subject take a look at Civil rights movement#Civil rights movement in Northern Ireland as it is a vandalised mess. Which in a way is good because what's left if you just delete the vandalisms is a bunch of non-sequiturs. -- 88.97.11.54 11:13, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Ok, while I recognize the various positions that lead to the consensus to remove all flags, the infobox suffers from the lack of one. So, my suggestion is, why not use a neutral unoffical flag? St. Patrick's Flag or the Ulster Flag, with specific notation that they are just regional flags... perhaps even a proposed flag with "Proposed Flag" under it? I'm aware that this debate is tired to most, but the top of page is very bland and completely lacking in any symbolism of Northern Ireland. -- MichiganCharms 04:57, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Any thoughts on changing the images in the article? The Mussenden Temple is an interesting photo, but should be replaced with the far more recognisable Image:Causeway-code poet-4.jpg. I also think the mural photo should be replaced. It we replace it with another mural photo then Image:Derry mural.jpg fits in with the accompanying text. But I would prefer a historical photograph, something like Image:Carson signing Solemn League and Covenant.jpg. There should also be a couple of photos of Derry and Belfast, like Image:Shipquay Street Derry SMC 2005.jpg and Image:H&W Cranes2.jpg or Image:Belfast City Hall - Carisenda.jpg or Image:Stormont Parliamentary Building 01.JPG. Stu ’Bout ye! 08:20, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
A request for comments has been filed concerning the conduct of Sarah777. The discussion can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Sarah777, where you may want to participate. -- sony-youth pléigh 14:08, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Since the flag and arms are back in I'd like to change to captions to "Former flag of ..." and give dates etc. but cannot do the same for the coat of arms. Could someone look at the code and see what can be done. -- sony-youth pléigh 10:17, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
The page has been protected again at a stage that appears to endorse the POV of the campaign to remove the Flag of Northern Ireland from Wikipedia.. just like all the other articles and templates regarding this exact issue! -- Mal 23:17, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
The Ulster Banner is not Northern Ireland's flag. That some people call it "the Northern Ireland flag" does not mean it is anymore than calling Northern Ireland "the occupied six counties" means that it is. There is legislation regarding the use of flags in Northern Ireland, and this legislation does not recognise the Ulster Banner. The English, Scottish and Welsh flags are all recognised to varying degrees by the British government; the Ulster Banner is not. Even the main Unionist parties eschew the Ulster Banner in favour of the Union Flag. [13] [14] I hardly need to point out that it does have negative connotations for many, both Catholic and Protestant. Given that its status is unofficial, this is an important consideration for us.
Now, it is used by various sporting bodies in lieu of a flag, and that's certainly one argument for using it in the info box. But that's not the only consideration, and it certainly is not the same at it *obviously* being *the* Northern Ireland flag. Let's stick to the verifiable facts. Martin 02:27, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
I'll start with my disclosure: I'm not from any of Northern Ireland, the Republic of Ireland, or any part of the United Kingdom. I have no agenda to push, nor any political alignment. My interest here comes from the desire to see an end to this disruptive edit warring.
I think that
is unquestionably a widely known flag representing Northern Ireland, and to omit it from the infobox in this main article is puzzling. For example, just this past weekend I was watching the
2007 U.S. Open Golf Championship on television, and at times in the third round, I saw
Graeme McDowell's name tagged with that flag. I hadn't even heard of him before (
Darren Clarke is the only golfer from Northern Ireland I knew), but I instantly recognized his nationality because of the flag. The
US Open website is also showing the flag icon. It has been mentioned before that
FIFA use that flag on
their web site and the
Commonwealth Games Federation does too on
their web site.
From my perspective, I think it is safe to say that this flag is clearly the de facto flag of Northern Ireland, even if it is not the de jure flag. I think the "no flag" camp on Wikipedia isn't really representing a NPOV position because of that. I think that using the argument that it hasn't been a legal flag since 1972 as justification for outright removal from the infobox has elements of WP:IDONTLIKEIT and WP:POINT. Neutral point of view is supposed to balance different views, and I don't see outright removal of the flag as considering the view of people like me who recognize that flag.
With that in mind, I would propose that the flag be put back in the infobox, but with a caption like:
The word-smithing can follow, but my point is that we can appeal to both views with something like this. This caption clearly states the legal status, and recognizes the widespread usage. I think the "Symbols" section of this article and the whole Northern Ireland flags issue article are both fairly well written, and help explain the situation.
I think it would be overly optimistic to think that my comments will impel both sides of this debate to work towards a compromise consensus solution, but I had to say something! The tug of war that this page has become is not helpful to the project. Andrwsc 05:02, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
I can see right away that the official flag of Northern Ireland is going to cause controversy. There are two options: 1) That this is an encyclopedia, and we stick with the correct information or 2) We appease a minority of people by changing the flag to the defunct Northern Ireland flag.. some of whom will still not accept that flag either.
The emblem of the Northern Ireland Assembly is just that - an emblem used by that body. The proposed flags have not yet been adopted and so are not official.
This leads me back to the two suggestions above - the official flag of Northern Ireland (the Union Jack), or the unofficial Northern Ireland Flag. I do not want to purposely cause offence (though it seems to me that anyone likely to be offended by the official flag would also refuse to accept the existance of Northern Ireland in the first place), but I do want to include factual information in this encyclopedia.
Hmm, outside as in what? Would you count me? -- John 14:18, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Some additional thoughts come to mind after seeing these comments:
With that in mind, I offer another suggestion. How about something like this?
![]() |
![]() | |
The
Union Flag is the only official flag of Northern Ireland |
The
Ulster Banner was officially used from 1953-72 and has some de facto usage now |
I would hope that this kind of solution addresses both main viewpoints in this issue. Remember, a good compromise probably means that not everybody likes it, but everybody can live with it. I believe a solution can be found, but I am an optimist. Andrwsc 20:19, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Agree. There is no compelling need for a flag. Why is that simple fact so difficult for some editors to accept? Why the determination to insert pov into the infobox? I don't see the point. It is time we all accepted that there will be no agreement here and thus "no flag" is the neutral position. ( Sarah777 20:51, 22 June 2007 (UTC))
I agree with Andrwsc's initial thoughts and, in fact, its been basically what I've been saying all along. I would be happy with that compromise and I seem to remember the article did sit with that very compromise for a while, until around the beginning of this year was it..? -- Mal 10:38, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Regretfully, this discussion is degenerating to the same old rhetoric, instead of moving forward to a lasting compromise consensus. It's difficult for me to understand statements such as "there is no NI flag" ( Sarah777) and "it is not the role of WP to invent a flag when none exists" ( padraig3uk). Clearly it "exists". I saw it on the U.S. Open telecast last week. You can see it in a photo of the Northern Ireland flag bearer in the 2002 Commonwealth Games on the BBC web site. So then, how can I understand statements that it is "used by extremists on one side of a divided community" ( padraig3uk) or that it is a "divisive sectarian symbol" ( Sarah777)? Unless the Commonwealth Games Council for Northern Ireland and the Irish Football Association only represent "extremist" athletes, these statements can only be viewed as hyperbole language used to push a certain position.
To restate some obvious facts and policy:
The only conclusion that can be drawn from these points, while maintaining Wikipedia policy, is to show both flags, with appropriate explanatory captions. Of the four options available (show one flag only, the other flag only, show both, or show neither), I truly believe that this is the alternative that best follows Wikipedia policy. Andrwsc 19:09, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
I totally agree with the original comments from andrew. Traditional unionist 17:46, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Just for anyone who is interested: Both the BBC and even the SDLP refer to the "Northern Ireland flag" and "red-and-white Northern Ireland flag" respectively [15]. beano 10:39, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
The former flag of the government of Northern Ireland should not be in the infobox. It is the FORMER flag of Northern Ireland, not the current flag of Northern Ireland. It would be like putting the swastika flag in the Germany page as it is the Former flag of Germany. The only flag that is for a fact the flag of Northern Ireland, the only flag backed up by legislation is the Union Jack. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.29.236.244 ( talk • contribs)
You miss the point. The Ulster Banner is clearly used today, so it is not just a former flag. Also, this issue cannot be dropped until consensus is reached, because the article is under protection until that time. You can't dismiss opinions you disagree with in an attempt to have the article unprotected. I am trying to reach a mutually agreeable position in an attempt to reach consensus — I suggest you also try to have an open mind and do the same thing, so that we can resolve the issue properly and move on to improving the article. Andrwsc 20:35, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
What does O6 mean? - some relative of oxygen?? - I hope it is not a bigoted, biased and blatently offensive term for Northern Ireland —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dionysus99 ( talk • contribs) 09:25, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
(deindent) So you believe that FIFA and UEFA dictate that the IFA uses this flag at matches and on their websites? Is there any evidence for this? -- John 17:57, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
The vast majority of images on this page are taken up by symbols of dispute - from the flags debate to the Free Derry mural.
Meanwhile the page doesn't even have a picture of Stormont. Now I don't imagine there are many provinces or regions on Wikipedia with pages that don't show their significant legislative body.
I would have assumed that the page would be better made up of things that are undisputed and actually make Northern Ireland seem like the fairly normal place it is becoming, rather than squabbling over flags and concentrating on the divide which is becoming increasingly unimportant. -- Breadandcheese 20:30, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Agree totally. An excellent reason for removing ALL divisive symbols. ( Sarah777 20:53, 22 June 2007 (UTC))
Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not censored, it is displaying the truth. In an article on a place that is so divided, the truth is there is division. - MichiganCharms 21:20, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Protection expires in a few hours and I have been asked to renew it. What do other people think? Is there likely to be another edit war over flags in infoboxes or some other issue, or should we let it go unprotected for a while? -- John 04:50, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
Could we try to ensure that the any Curreny such as the Gross domestic product is listed with the GBP (£) as neither Northern Ireland, United Kingdom or any of the British Isles use the US Dollar unless they are on Holiday to the USA. Craig7006 19:48, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
:Disagree. As the British Isles are claimed to include Ireland and Ireland does not use GBP; US$ are more appropriate (though I'd prefer € myself).
Ooops! Wrong talk...I thought this was the "British" Isles page - really must start reading stuff before responding. (
Sarah777
00:29, 30 June 2007 (UTC))
I did not get overly involved in the awful debacle of removing the Northern Ireland flag from the Northern Ireland article. Bow I want to challenge some things that have been taken as given. 1) The Union Flag has no sanction from anything, save for the Mandleson flags order. It's design or use is not laid down in legislation, only convention. It is not in the legalistic sense an official flag, the UK does not have one. 2) There is no citation on any article, despite tags requesting citations for the claim that the flag only began usage in 1953, nor any source for the claim that it fell into disuse in 1972 or 3. Now both these things may well be correct, but why is an entire (and illogical) argument being based on two unsourced claims? Traditional unionist 21:55, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
I'd object. The Irish flag has nothing to do with Northern Ireland. The two flags option with explanations seems the most reasonable. I'm also still waiting for sources..... Traditional unionist 07:13, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
I want to remind those who oppose the use of the flag that I am still waiting for references to the claims I cite. Traditional unionist 21:17, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Even that isn't very clear. It doesn't state the detail of why the Union flag is the only official flag, gives no background and only mentions the Mandleson flags order. I might try this myself. Traditional unionist 09:42, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Looking at that parliamentary answer again, it also says that there is nothing official about the welsh flag either! Which vindicates the view that UK flags are not based in any official use, as there are no specific written guidelines. Traditional unionist 11:01, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Unless that answer was written using the same lazy assumptions that have been applied here? I still have not seen any fully drawn out explanation for the view it fell into disuse in 1973. Traditional unionist 11:23, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
In all honesty, how is it possible to reach a consensus on an issue, with people with attitudes like this?! Its incredulous! British rule in Northern Ireland was entrenched by the Belfast Agreement! The Union flag is the internationally accepted flag of Crossmaglen and Londonderry! Australia used the Union flag as a symbol of its colonial history - this is not in any way relevant to the issue at hand! The tricolour does not represent Northern Ireland, and never has! Traditional unionist 13:05, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
That fact that the "International Community" chose to ignore did not make it "illegal", and with respect I thing the Constitution of a democratic sovereign state has rather more validity than any personal declaration you or I might make. So, the tricolour had "legality" just as the UB had. That is the only point I'm making here. ( Sarah777 03:25, 13 July 2007 (UTC))
-
MichiganCharms
03:28, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
This is probably far to naive to ever work, but I've made up a propsed change to the infobox in my sandbox. -- sony-youth pléigh 09:03, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
The idea of having offensive flags is an interesting one. Is it possible to include the minority chinese, vietnamese and traveller communities in this. If we can all offend everyone equally we may be able to make progress.-- ZincBelief 14:09, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Traditional Unionist, you should be confident, a compromise is always possible. A patchwork idea has merits. You have proposed that the UB is the de facto flag for Northern Ireland. I personally agree, but nationalists believe (rightly or wrongly) that this is a unionist flag for unionists, totally unrepresentative of them. Similarly the tricolour, to a unionist this represents an all-ireland, but this is what a nationalist would see as representing them. Hence I believe in keeping with ZincBelief and sony's proposal of patchwork. I would keep the UJ as the main flag (due to it being most symbolic of the UK and for that reason only), whilst having the UB and tricolour as other flags of equal size, each one symbolising nationalist and unionist people. Essentially this is sony's sandbox but with the UJ and UB switched and I also believe, as sony has done, that it is important to point out the NI has no official flag at the moment. ~~ BoroForLife 16:37, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Would you not agree that the use of the UB to represent Northern Ireland at the commonwealth games gives it de facto status? ~~ BoroForLife 17:18, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
How about This as a alternative version.-- padraig 17:40, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
I have altered the Wording on the Ulster Banner, see Here.-- padraig 09:31, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Thats my understanding, although the Ulster branch (as it does in rugby) uses white and red with the red hand [22]. The key point here is that there are exceptions to every rule but that the rule stands in the majority of cases. ~~ BoroForLife 21:29, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
and no-one's done anything silly yet, shall we decide where to go from here with regard to flags? Straw poll? Biofoundationsoflanguage 17:18, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Absolutely not. It implies that the republic has some jurisdiction over NI, that is not true. The proposal is misleading. Traditional unionist 21:44, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Well if Lighthouses are the path to a united Ireland I'll be amazed. Using an irrelevant flag in the infobox of a country is a bizarre suggestion. It would be like using the French Tricolour in the infobox for Canada because of Quebec. Traditional unionist 07:46, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
It may not be a perfect analogy, but it certainly is not disingenuous. What flags each side use is a matter for the flags issue page, not the NI infobox. Traditional unionist 08:17, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
We need a flag that can offend everyone equally. How about the red finger of Ulster, as used in the portadown news website?-- ZincBelief 10:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
actually I think that Biofoundationsoflanguage's suggestion is a good compromise. Traditional unionist 11:06, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Encyclopedia Britannica uses the NI flag to denote Northern Ireland - http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9110757/Northern-Ireland
-- 82.29.235.160 17:28, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
-- padraig 17:42, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
That's probably fair enough. With or without the Union Flag above it? Traditional unionist 09:57, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
You are wring to equate the tricolour with the Flag of Northern Ireland. We can dispute the current status of the latter, but what is certainly true is that the tricolour has never had any relevance to Northern Ireland. Your point is not valid. Traditional unionist 10:04, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Lads, you're not going to solve this one here. You know that. Don't try shouting each other down over it. -- sony-youth pléigh 10:45, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Google "Flag of Northern Ireland" what do you get? That together with the sporting uses makes it de facto, common use, flag of NI. Yet again you want to remove all UK flags from wikipedia, NO flags in the UK have "civic" status. Traditional unionist 13:40, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
The tired and insulting approach of reducing the people of northern ireland to two groups will not help resolve this debate, nor is it appropriate in my opinion. It is in essence a breach of WP:Civil. The overwhelming statistical evidence (as you can see from google) is that the Ulster Banner has de facto status. Britannica encyclopedia uses it. Non political entities use it, northern ireland can perhaps be viewed as something more than just a political entity. However the statistical weight is enough to add this into the infobox with appropriate notes. "De facto flag, often regarded as offensive to the Nationalist community" This wikipedia article is not about sticking two fingers up at political ideology. It should not be about and not be controlled by political ideology. This is a neutral and academic article. It's purpose is to explain, not to offend. Those who continue to seek to exercise their bitter political viewpoints have nothing to add to this article and should desist from editing it. Adding in the Ulster Banner will only insult those who want to be insulted. Anyone who choses to read the entire article will clearly find the true story behind flags. If we want an infobox in keeping with the rest of the UK 'home nations' then it is clear which path we should take. If we want to be tied to pety political viewpoints lets just drop the entire infobox. Which will it be?-- ZincBelief 14:40, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
It strikes me that everyone save for Padraig is agreed on a proposal. It seems that we are agreed that it is the de facto flag of NI, even if neither Padraig nor I particularly like that fact. I think we can move this forward now. Traditional unionist 15:47, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Anyone else feeling a sense of deja vu? Biofoundationsoflanguage 17:01, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Padraig, I think part of your opposition to the UB is the continous insistance of traditional unionist that it should be used, which you would equate to his unionist beliefs and therefore a 'insult' (for want of a much better word) to your nationalist beliefs. Leaving this aside you must surely see that the UB is a widely reconised symbol of Northern Ireland. The UB is devisive (like NI), used by unionists (like many people from NI are) and is flown by many people as their flag of NI. Thus if you look at it this way it makes perfect sense to use it. Traditional Unionist has offered a compromise of including the 'UJ is the only official..etc' writing above it. To me this seems a fair compromise to end a length, prolonged debate which to an outsider would make Norn Irish people seem petty and arguementative. There are also a number of valid points for excluding the tricolour, mostly that it is representative of a united Ireland (whole island) and not spefically NI, which is what this article is about. ~~ BoroForLife 19:29, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
“ | The Union Flag is the official flag used by the government to represent Northern Ireland. The former official flag, the Ulster Banner, continues to be used by groups (such as sports teams) representing the territory in an unofficial manner (see Northern Ireland flags issue). | ” |
Zinc, I *am* an outsider. What political ideology are you accusing me of pushing? I'm still at a loss as to why outsiders decide what the flag of NI is. That is a sincere question, btw, not some snarky retorical question. If outsiders think the UB flag is *the* flag of NI, it is pressumably because that is what these outsiders believe the insiders hold as their flag, no? Nuclare 12:02, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
-- ZincBelief 12:24, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
I think we've reached agreement on this. Add it? Biofoundationsoflanguage 13:17, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
I have made up another proposal for editors to consider here see what you think.-- padraig 00:34, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
The compromise that I thought we had arrived at was the UJ, with the NI Flag below it, perhaps smaller, with a short explination of the issues. It would be better to put de facto under the NI Flag too. Traditional unionist 11:41, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
This discussion alone is already 51 KB long - is it getting anywhere other than confusion? Timrollpickering 12:08, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
This has been explained. The tricolour is not a flag unique to Northern Ireland unlike the Ulster Banner. They aren't comparible. Biofoundationsoflanguage 13:51, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
It may be true that the Ulster Banner may not represent Northern Ireland but at one time it did represent Northern Ireland and is used by the football and was flown at the Mexico world cup to represent Northern Ireland, so it should be in the article. Quick Reference 15:38, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Padraig, who made the flags of the Irish provinces official? Hundreds of flags around the world are de facto through common usage, this is not a special case. I'm away for the weekend, so this debate will run without me until Monday, but I for one agree with the compromise by Andrew, and disagree with padraig that it is in any POV and is certainly not OR. Traditional unionist 16:47, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Here's my UB suggestion (if there is an insistence on the UB's inclusion): Use the UF and Assembly symbol on top as "Official Flags and Symbols" (per Padraig). But below that (and the flag can even be smaller than the officials, if possible), put the UB, but make it's header "Flag for International Sports" (or some such that specifies it is *not* THE unoffical flag of NI. The text above the UB image could be something like: "Some sports organizations in NI currently use the UB for international competition, but this flag has no official status and is seen by some as a symbol of Unionist politics rather than a symbol of NI as a whole." I feel rejection on its way, but there you go for my humble opinion... :-) Nuclare 12:54, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
We have consensus to have the UB either alongside the Assembly symbol or the Union Flag- so we should go with that for now and move forward. Thanks Astrotrain 15:01, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
May I suggest a straw poll on all options so far? Biofoundationsoflanguage 16:12, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Please vote for your preferred option:
Option A - user:Andrwsc's proposal of The Union Flag and the Ulster Banner with the following wording
“ | The Union Flag is the official flag used by the government to represent Northern Ireland. The former official flag, the Ulster Banner, continues to be used by groups (such as sports teams) representing the territory in an unofficial manner (see Northern Ireland flags issue). | ” |
Option B - User:Sony-youth's proposal [ here]
“ | The Ulster Banner and with The Northern Ireland Assembly Symbol beside it. with note below The Union Flag is the only official flag that represents Northern Ireland. The former official flag, the Ulster Banner, continues to be used by groups (such as sports teams) representing the territory in an unofficial manner (see Northern Ireland flags issue). | ” |
Option C - user:padraig's First proposal [ here]
“ | The Union Flag on top with the Ulster Banner and Tricolour both below with notes. | ” |
Option D - user:padraig's Second proposal [ here]
“ | The Union Flag with The Northern Ireland Assembly Symbol beside it. | ” |
I would like to add this option.
Option E - user:padraig's Third proposal [ here]
“ | The Union Flag and Assembly Symbol on top with the Ulster Banner and Tricolour both below with notes. | ” |
I hope everyone agrees that these are fairly represent the 5 serious options as above. Please vote, sign your preference.
Before voting, I'm trying to verify one point. As suggested in both Sony-youth's and Andrwsc's wording: what groups other than sports are using the UB to "represent the territory"? Nuclare 19:21, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Another idea This should please all sides Here.-- padraig 16:11, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
The current position of the page shows no flag. Is there a reason why a "status quo" option has not been put forward. Quick Reference 12:48, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
I note with interest that one additional option, that being Option E, was added after a number of pollers had made their mark, so why not add another.
Wouldn't you feel that this exercise is fundamentally flawed if the options which are put forward in a the poll are not explicitly discussed prior to the poll being initiated. Perhaps there should have been a "talks about talks" type of discussion about what options were to be put forward and what system of voting was to be adopted prior to the poll starting.
I deal with market research in my line of work and the outcome of questionnaires or straw polls such as this is to a large degree influence by the manner, sequence and phraseology used. Quick Reference 13:42, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
I agree with Traditional unionist on each the points he raises I suggest that before this poll goes further it should be halted so that an explicit discussion outlining the various options being put forward can be agreed on, the timeframe of the poll agreed and the method of calculating the votes agree. If this is undertaken correctly then the outcome of the poll has a greater chance of being accepted.
Bio, is also right that straw polls are tests for consensus, but I would reiterate that there is an increase level of probability if a poll is not only fair but is seen to be fair. Quick Reference 14:27, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
For everyone's convenience, here are the results so far.
1st preferences | 2nd preferences | 3rd preferences | all prefs |
---|---|---|---|
A x 3 | A x 2 | A x 0 | A x 5 |
B x 7 | B x 3 | B x 0 | B x 10 |
C x 1 | C x 2 | C x 1 | C x 4 |
D x 2 | D x 1 | D x 1 | D x 4 |
E x 1 | E x 0 | E x 0 | E x 1 |
14 |
Biofoundationsoflanguage 14:37, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Its a strawpoll, that all there is no concensus in nor was one sought, we are discussing differents ideas that all.-- padraig 17:35, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
With at least four possible images that we've been discussing that could go into the infobox, there are 16 possible combinations that could be chosen. There is very little chance at any sort of consensus with that number of options. Instead, I propose that we answer four simpler questions, and look for any strong consensus there:
I'm thinking that if we can get > 2/3 majority for each of these questions, once you add in the "don't care" to either the yes or no side, that would tell us something about consensus (or lack thereof). Comments? Andrwsc 23:21, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
I'll start with my responses:
To vote choose either Yes / No / Don't care in each of the four options
Hey! Anyone watching; 5 "yes" votes by Red Links! ( Sarah777 19:57, 9 August 2007 (UTC))
What do you mean you've already "clocked" them - I voted the same as everybody else? Why is my link coming up in red? -- Pondersomething 01:34, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Two dud "yes" votes here! ( Sarah777 19:59, 9 August 2007 (UTC))
I'm not a "dud" vote! My vote counts the same as yours! Why do you call mine a dud vote?? -- Pondersomething 01:36, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
My vote above is quite different to "my proposal", that's because what I had wanted was a "package" deal. A kind of al la carte staw poll doesn't really capture the issue, and in that case the only image that I can say is a legitimate emblem of Northern Ireland is the assembly logo. -- sony-youth pléigh 08:53, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Passing through Loyalist areas decorated for the twelth, I've seen very few plain Ulster banners. The version defaced with the Union Flag is far more common. So, if we want a de facto flag for the Loyalist community, that's the one to use. -- Cavrdg 05:32, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
There is no official flag for Northern Ireland so why have we not got an option to leave it blank instead of putting in a flag that will be disputed no matter which one is picked be it the Ulster banner or the Tri Colour. BigDunc 14:38, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
There are a lot of new editors jumping in to vote in the Ulster Banner Straw Poll you would not want to be paranoid about things would you. BigDunc 18:32, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Can't we use the Tricolour just to see what the Newsletter say about it? That article is a hoot! "There is no dispute about which flag represents Northern Ireland" ~ Danny Kennedy, UUP. That's wishful thinking if ever I've seen it! Martin 18:27, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
In Case anyone is confused as to the Status of Flags in the UK read this:
The English, Scottish and Welsh Flags are National Flags, but none for Northern Ireland except the Union Flag.-- Padraig 13:59, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Yes that is why the Union flag should be on the main page. Quite bizzare that is isn't - and makes Wikipedia look like a joke. Dionysus99 11:28, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
The box has exploded in size and is spraying bold, large and centre commands onto the main text - is anyone able to fix this? Timrollpickering 12:14, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
The template it self was edited at the time it went weird ( hist). I wonder what effect the changes will have on our options for the flag issue? -- sony-youth pléigh 14:01, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
IT'S BAAAAACK! Run for your lives -- Infobox-zilla has returned! Nuclare 11:04, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Let's all start a massive campaign begging the MLA's to come up with a damn flag already. Imagine the press we'd get :p - MichiganCharms 19:27, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Please see
Talk:Ulster-Scots#Flag for whether or not
is the right flag to illustrate articles such as that,
Scots-Irish American and the like.
Timrollpickering
19:55, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
This a proposal for a UK manual of style. This will of course cover the entirity of Ireland during the period 1801-1922 and Northern Ireland since 1922. I don't know how this will effect the current WP:IMOS but input would be welcome: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (United Kingdom-related articles). -- sony-youth pléigh 14:33, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
151 square miles? Wasn't it always 147? When and how did it increase in area.
Global warming is nothing more than leftist propaganda and the same pseudoscience as Evilution! Come to thing of it, wasn't Ulster always 4,552 square miles? Was the old figure simply an error? It's now listed as 4,559! I find it quite exciting that the British Empire is finally growing again after decades of continuious decline even if that recovery is mearly the result of natural processes rather than reconquest. :) (Ulster of course not being a colony but a part of the United Kingdom. The UK is not just the imperial power governing the British Empire it is part of the Empire itself, in fact it is the only large populous territory remaining in it!)
Just wondering, should Gerry Adams not be deputy first minister as he is the leader of Sinn Fein,same way as the lead of the D.U.P. is first minister? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.19.80.19 ( talk) 14:32, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 10 |
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 10 |
I didn't know where else to write this, but as someone who has no vested interest in this conflict, and who just wanted to learn about it, I have to say that this Wikipedia topic page was disappointing.
Basic issues aren't defined - for instance, "The Troubles" are simply not given a basic definition. There is a skeletal history of Northern Ireland but nothing comprehensive.
The writing in the whole article is of questionable quality.
I have no doubt that this is a result of political bickering, which I am not interested in being involved with. All I can say is: sort your shit out, and clean this thing up. If the Arab-Israeli conflict pages are decent (I am an expert and a partisan in THAT conflict and I think the wiki pages are reasonably balanced and of decent quality) then surely you guys can bring the quality up on this one.
The ulster banner should be from the infobox becauce it is no longer offical, this is an encyclopedic article and should use the only offical flag for Northern Ireland which is the Union Flag and has been since the the Parliament of Northern Ireland was abolished in 1973. While the old flag may be used largely in the unionist community it is not sanctioned by the government.--
Barry
talk
19:04, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
Yes, lets take the coat of arms out. Why not take every thing out that does not have "de facto" or "de jure" status. What we need to realise is that Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom and not everything in the United Kingdom is written down in law. Soon we will have a blank page. Djegan 21:01, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
The most recent citation [2] does not show that the Union Flag is the official flag of Northern Ireland but simply that it must be flown on certain days on certain building and the use of the Royal Standard and European Union; and a prohibition on other flags. Djegan 21:35, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
If we're going to have the "Ulster" Banner on, then we should also have the tricolour on and explain that they are the two flags used by either side of the community. Derry Boi 12:29, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
The Israel comparison does not work Israel is a state with a government that recognises their own flag the banner was the flag of a body that was abolished 30 years ago having it in the infobox is pov the best solution would be to have no flag as the British Government does not recognizes any except the Union Flag there should just be a link to the flag of Northern Ireland. --
Barry
talk
14:03, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
The former government of Northern Ireland standard (unofficially known as the "Ulster Banner") was NEVER the flag of Northern Ireland, it was the standard of the former government of Northern Ireland.
This was the standard for the "government" in N. Ireland from Irish partition until stormont suspension in the early 70s. As a flag, it represents a government which openly treated Catholics as second class citizens (a "Protestant governement for the Protestant people" as a former N. Ireland First Minister once proclaimed on Storemont steps).
The usage of this flag is not unlike the usage of the Nazi Germany flag, in terms of offense caused to the people it is offending.
The Northern Ireland page does not require flag. It is a clarly touchy subject, which many opposing view. Some claim the Irish Tricolour should be used, some the Ulster Flag, some the former standard of the government of N. Ireland flag. These apposing views make up the disputed "Flags of Northern Ireland" page, which clearly explains to people what the debate is about and gives them any information they may need or want on flags.
This is not a street corner or a lamp post, an impartial internet encyclopedia should not be used to push opinions and point of views. In order to remain fair and factual, and to lessen any offense to people affected by the subject, flags should not be used. The standard of the currently suspended government of N. Ireland (which is now to be re-opened) should be used if anything, since the flag of an establishment 30 years in the past is currently being used.
See the debate Below and post replys there
i disagree the aussie /new zealand flags both have the union flag no problem there/here also the red hand of northern ireland appears to be one of the oldest seals in the british irish isles? why disregard your history i personly like the northern flag i have been told the southern irish /republic flag is green catholic white unite orange protestant?having travlled a little most northern people i have met regardless of religion or politic refer to themself as ulster.or northern irish so they deserve there own flag.as regards some people i have met from the south tell me its not orange but gold on the flag i dont see anything wrong with the union flag as it seems to represent the majority.or the red hand as it predates british/ viking/or any other imports what about the harp i notice the royal irish regiment use perhaps with the red hand inserted in the center white background either way have a comp pick designs and let the people pick as for now to have a country with no flag is rediculous keep the red hand one on here till some one sorts it out david --unsigned comment posted by
User:58.162.74.176 10.30am, 2 May 2007
The article states :
The population of Northern Ireland was estimated as being 1,710,300 on 30 June 2004. In the 2001 census, 53.1% of the Northern Irish population were Protestant, (Presbyterian, Church of Ireland, Methodist and other Protestant denominations), 43.8% of the population were Roman Catholic, 0.4% Other and 2.7% none.[3][4]
Using the CAIN data
Pres 20.7 % CoI 15.3 % Meth 3.5 % Other Christian 6.1 %
Totalling 45.6 %
The total response was (100-13.88) = 86.1 %
Giving a total non-RC christian pop of (45.6/86.1) = 53%
Am I doing something wrong, or are we counting all non-RC christians as protestant? 86.12.249.63 14:03, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
I would make the assumption that and this is an assumption as to why non- RC Christians are counted as protestant is the reason that there is so few, after all the population of Northern Ireland is hardly gigantic. This also reminds me of a stipulation within the Patten report on the reform of the RUC that the new PSNI be made up of 50% catholic and 50% non RC, this is not a direct quote but it certainly does give a bit of weight to the idea of not counting individual Protestants as zzuuzz hinted at earlier.-- Edengmcc 02:14, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Is there any reliable way of working this out? Derry Boi 16:14, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Whoever has been sorting this out, they have been mislead in certain areas.
Firstly, the term "Northern Irish" should not be used in the article to describle all people of Northern Ireland. Although I don't have a personal problem with the definition, the term takes away the right of all people in Northern Ireland to identify themselves as Irish, as most people tend to do nowadays, in regional identity (Unionists, with Nationality of British) or Nationality (Nationalists). Ian Paisley himself has stated he would never deny the fact that he's an Irishman, and it's listed on his quotes on this very website, is there anything more concrete than that lol?
The term "People of Northern Ireland, "Citizens of Northern Ireland" should always be used, as is the case in all official documentation.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by BBX ( talk • contribs) 02:58, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Tripe!! "Northern Irish" is perfectly adequate. I don't see how this takes away anyones "right" to anything. One can describe themselves "Northern Irish" and British. Likwise one can describe themselves as "Northern Irish" and "Irish". I could describe myself as "Northern Irish", "British" or "Irish" depending on context. Jonto 00:03, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Northern Irish is a ridiculous term - iv never heard of 'republican irish' - if Ireland had been partition 16:16 counties which one would be Irish? Just because one area is smaller and unioned with another does not make it any less Irish. If your to use the argument 'not irish at all' because 400 hundred years ago my ancestors
came from Scotland means that no ethinic person in Britain or ireland is part of those nations. Your Irish. SIDDOWN
Secondly ..
The Agreement - as listed - states that all people of Northern Ireland have the birth right of either Irish or British nationality of both. Irish nationality has always been extended to the people of Northern Ireland, in fact, the Republic government claimed the territory until the 1998 Agreement, which furthers the arguement.
By claiming all Northern Ireland people are British (which is how I percieve the current paragraph) it takes away the rights set out in the agreement of having Irish OR British OR both nationalities, it does not state that a person is born with either nationality, it states they are born "citizens of Northern Ireland", which is an area that both the Republic of Ireland and Britian extend Nationality to. This section needs re-worded to fairly reflect the rights of all people of Northern Ireland and the diverse national law we are proud to have. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by BBX ( talk • contribs) 02:58, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Since there is no dispute, I will alter the section. I have no doubt, however, that is will be reverted back to the incorrect statement within a short amount of time though, as seems to be the case with quite a lot of sections of this page.
The former government of Northern Ireland standard (often referred here incorrectly as the "flag of Northern Ireland" should be replaced as it has no official merit. It has not been used for over 30 years and when it was, it was the standard of the Stormont government, not the flag of N. Ireland. Many Catholics find this flag offensive as it represents a government which openly discriminated against them for 50 years.
If the flag is to be listed as "de facto", then the Irish tricolour should be listed as "de facto" for Ireland, as it is indeed the de facto flag of the island.
I see no reason why a flag should be used. The people of Northern Ireland lean away from usage of flags, as they are a sore spot for us all. The flag of the UK is not used for England, Scotland, Wales or any other colony, so I see no reason for it's usage on the N. Ireland page, other than political agendas.
There should be no flag used, the current standard of the government of N. Ireland should be used if anything (the blue flax symbol, which I can get upon request), and all "flags" should be kept in the flags of Northern Ireland section/page, to keep political agendas of this page.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by [[User: BBX | BBX ]] ([[User talk: BBX |talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/ BBX |contribs]]) 03:07, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
The flag officially under United Kingdom law for Northern Ireland is the Union Jack so the flag for Northern Ireland on here should be the Union Jack too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Somethingoranother ( talk • contribs)
This is not an official flag, it is the former flag of the Northern Ireland House of Commons 1922-72, its use in this infobox is misleading as the flag has no more legal status then the Irish Tricolour. The flax banner of the Northern Ireland Assembly should be used, as this is not seen as offensive by either side of the community.-- padraig3uk 09:25, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Look, this is just getting really silly - this debate has been covered over and over again. The "Ulster Banner" is NI's de facto regional flag. In UK contexts "officialness" does not really exist. It is not "official", "unofficial", or "former official" as all these terms are rather meaningless, and hence displaying dates of its "officialness" is also meaningless. Since the old Stormont government the flag always was the de facto civil flag - just because the government was prorogued does not mean that its de facto civil status changes. It still is de facto, no other widely recognised flag is in existence, and something being described as "de facto" does not require universal support. Jonto 16:44, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
I have protected this article, please reach consensus on this talk page about the appropriate wording for the infobox. It is clear there is not agreement on the edits being made, so you shouldn't keep reverting things on the article... Thanks/ wangi 14:33, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
I have reverted the flag / arms descriptions to the previous stable version (form a sample of previous versions), hopefully this is suitable. / wangi 21:56, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
I think we should keep the old flag and coat of arms of the government of Northern Ireland. No claims are made on the page that they are the current official items, actually it says "(former official)" which I think is enough. The symbols are easily recognisable and people who want the details should click on the link to the respective article.
The flag of the former government may not be currently official, but this article is about Northern Ireland which is part of the United Kingdom, and many things in the United Kingdom are by convention and tradition. The former flag is perhaps one of the easiest recognisable flags of Northern Ireland, indeed if a different flag was used I wonder how long before this and other articles would refect the "new consensus", maybe never. Djegan 17:23, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Our options are:
Take your pick. :) Martin 17:30, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Astrotrain, the only local authorities that display the UB are a few Unionist Dominated councils, the vast majority of local councils don't fly any flags from their buildings, out of respect for both communities.-- padraig3uk 12:11, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
d) for now, and possibly c) when/if the Assembly resumes. If I'm reading this correctly, then currently, officially, NI does not have a flag. Wikipedia should reflect reality, not have one just because an infobox 'needs' one. By all means include the old flag, and/or de facto flag in the body, but with less prominence than the top of the page and with a proper explanation as to the status. Bastun 16:36, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
The Assembly hasn't got a flag yet, and a logo cannot be used. The reality is that NI does have a flag- its just not used by the Northern Ireland Office or the Police. Astrotrain 16:44, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
It would appear that the consensus is to remove the Ulster Banner and coat of arms from the infobox, I propose they now be removed, and they be included in the main article itself as historical items.-- padraig3uk 01:37, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
I have moved the images of the flag and coat of arms into the main article, I also created a new infobox - Infobox UK N-Ireland without the fields for flag etc - so that I could remove the images from the infobox. Is everyone ok with this.-- padraig3uk 11:31, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Well, there doesn't have to be a flag in the info box, but as most articles about countries (or administrative regions, or political units, or whatever) seem to have one, it is only reasonable to look for an alternative if we're advocating the removal of the Ulster Banner. While Northern Ireland does not have its own flag, there is a flag (shared by the rest of the UK) that has been legislated to be used for official purposes. Its use here would avoid any POV issues, IMHO. Martin 23:31, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Astrotrain, only yourself and Stu seem to want to retain the UB and coat of arms in the infobox, everyone else agrees it should be removed from the infobox. So instead of going round in circles here, can we decide on wether to replace them with something else or remove all flags and symbols from the infobox completely.-- padraig3uk 15:32, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Let's think about this: everyone recognises the Northern Irish flag as representing Northern Ireland. Those that don't are likely those whose POV would be that Northern Ireland doesn't, or shouldn't, exist at all. Following this logic then, we can see that those people would presumably not have any interest in editing an article about Northern Ireland.
The world, as exemplified by worldwide organisations such as FIFA, recognises and uses the Northern Ireland flag to represent Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland is, by the way, a country... though it is a rather unique country, being a country within a country.
My assertion is that it is fact that the flag that represents Northern Ireland is the one that has been used in the article's infobox for months, and that it is petty, agenda-driven POV to mount a campaign to remove it. The next logical step is to campaign to have the article itself removed, claiming that Northern Ireland itself is "POV". If you have no interest in Northern Ireland, then don't edit the article.. edit something else instead.
If and when the Northern Ireland Assembly starts again, and those elected officials decide on a new flag for Northern Ireland then, of course, that change should be reflected in this article. -- Mal 17:31, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
I have to completely agree with the above my Mal. It is not in some Irish Republicans' agenda to have anything related uniquely to NI. As has happened in the past certain members (one in particular) are showing obvious signs of an Irish Republican agenda to subtly remove or undermine all aspects of NI culture/identity. The entire debate has dissolved into those with a republican agenda agreeing with each other and posting excessively, with most other not posting or caring because the same issue has been repeated over and over (check history) with exactly the same outcome of keeping the flag.
Jonto
17:47, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
It would appear that certain users are determined to promote a certain POV on this article, and are determined to resist any attempt to rectify that problem, this is totaly contary to the rules of Wikipedia.-- padraig3uk 13:48, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Consensus was achieved at the time that [User:Padraig3uk|padraig3uk]] removed the banner. Since then we have had a refusal to respect the consensus; yet when the 'consensus' manufactured is against a perceived 'Nationalist' pov it appears to achieve the status of a Religious Orthodoxy. With High Priests interpreting all manner of subsidiary matters based on the imagined 'consensus'. The consensus is the banner be removed. ( Sarah777 20:11, 25 February 2007 (UTC))
Concencus was reached that the UB should be removed from the infobox, that concencus is being ignored by certain users pushing their POV, and have made that very clear here. The fact remains the UB has no legal status, and should not be promoted within the infobox.-- padraig3uk 00:44, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Mal, and Jonto, are you suggesting that only wikipedians that recognise that Northern Ireland is British are allowed to have a opinion on the content of the Northern ireland article.--padraig3uk 18:17, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Padraig, I think you need to seriously read what I had written again if you're asking that question. Otherwise be very careful about what words you're trying to fit into other peoples' mouths. -- Mal 05:05, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
I know what your question was in response to Padraig. I'm telling you not to put words in others' mouths. Thank you. -- Mal 15:22, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
I politely ask Astrotrain to remove the banner from the infobox to reflect the consensus. There is little point having a vote on 4 options when the result (d: no flag) can be totally ignored. The status quo is now NO FLAG. Anyone wishing to change this should call for a change and discuss the matter before tampering with the infobox. ( Sarah777 20:20, 25 February 2007 (UTC))
Astrotrain 13:45, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
I've noticed that flags.net now states that the Union Flag is Northern Ireland's official flag. [6] I wonder if someone over there is following our discussion? :) Martin 20:57, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
:*Remember we are simply seeing if there is a consensus - please no discussion in this section, feel free to discuss above or below, cheers
Note: In light of the strawpoll carried out here, isn't it time to put this issue to rest, and remove the flags froms the infobox. Then editors can spend their time helping to improve this and other N Ireland articles instead of edit warring over this issue.-- padraig3uk 07:54, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Indeed so, hence the text "Former flag of Northern Ireland 1953-72" underneath it. Our readers can read, you know. -- Guinnog 20:02, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I've been watching this discussion for a while, but haven't contributed to anything until now - and don't really want to get involved either (has nothing really to do with me). But why not just wait a couple of weeks to see what the assembly does. If the assembly meets and its the Union Flag they fly (not just on day one, but over time) then its pretty obvious that the Union Flag is the flag of NI. If they make noises about changing it then leave the Ulster Banner in place until they figure what it should be. -- sony-youth talk 10:30, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
-- padraig3uk 11:28, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes it represents the UK as a whole, but it is also has official individual usage in NI. Stu ’Bout ye! 13:51, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Why does it have to be flown all the time? That makes no difference? The reason it should be used here (if the UB is removed) is that it is "the only official flag that represents Northern Ireland". They can't be removed now, the status quo has to remain until the debate is over. sony youth's idea to wait and see what the Assembly does is a good idea, but if the debate has gone on here for this long I can only imagine how long the Assembly will take. I'm sure we're all pretty much sick of this debate, I know I am. Mediation or arbitration anyone? While mediation has worked in other recent disputes, I think it will make the debate last another six months. Arbcom may reject it for not having been to mediation, but I think we've shown sufficient effort to resolve the problem. Thoughts? My feeling is that it should be referred to Arbcom, by someone independent to the discussion. Stu ’Bout ye! 15:01, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
(deindent) As has been discussed here ad nauseam, while the Ulster Banner is not perfect and offends a section of the Northern Ireland population, it is still the closest we have got to a flag for the info box. Taken with the text explaining its unofficial status, I think it is as good as we will get, at least until the situation on the ground develops to allow a new flag to be adopted. There was certainly no consensus to remove it; please do not do so again. Thanks. -- Guinnog 16:00, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Just sectionising this, easier to follow. This is some marathon. I don't agree with you Martin, but I will say this - you are one stubborn wicket keeper! regards ( Sarah777 20:19, 3 April 2007 (UTC))
Padraig, you've made all these points before. But it doesn't change the fact that the dispute has not been resolved. Again, there is no consensus and your POV and feelings about the flags in question is irrelevant. I'm not going to break 3RR so I'm asking you to revert yourself so that this can be sorted out without a revert war. You seem to consider the matter over with, but it is not. We haven't even got to the second stage of the dispute resolution process. What you are doing is against policy. Stu ’Bout ye! 09:54, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
As I've just broken 3RR, feel free to report me. However this was to ensure the correct procedure is followed. This dispute is not yet over and the stages of the dispute resolution process are still to be completed. Therefore changing the article from the status quo is breaking process. Stu ’Bout ye! 11:05, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
You are avoiding answering the question Padraig. You argue that the UB glorifies Terrorism because it is used by its supporters. Now, by the same token, you must also argue that it glorifies football, glorifies historians, glorifies the athletics team at the commonwealth games and glorifies anyone else who uses it. You argument is afterall, POV by association, which is very contrived. If you are going to use the POV argument you need to justify it. If you want to argue on other matters, go ahead, but don't try to muddy the issue. Can we please settle POV first?-- ZincBelief 11:15, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
I see the UB flying from many Gov. buildings, including near my own house the Castlereagh borough council offices, it flys every day from that building, surely they are breaking the law? I also see it as I pass the Island Centre in Lisburn, flying from the flag pole of the council offices. As Northern Ireland is part of the UK, if this flag and coat of arms is to kept away from the info box, then surely it should be taken off all the other home nations of the UKs info boxes, to keep consistency within Wikipedia and the countries of the UK. -- Cka4004 12:38, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
By much, but not the majority of the population Vintage, however as the flag is not officially used, and as it has been taken down, the Union Flag should be used, however rare that may seam, but it is the flag used to represent NI at present across the world outside of sport.If some people refuse to accept the flag and coat of arms then I find their logic hard to understand, however in keeping with the other country infoboxes in the rest of the UK or infact that of the ROI then the Union Flag should be used if others cannot agree to accept the UB. -- Cka4004 17:36, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
I agree with Martin, -- Cka4004 17:53, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
"If D gets a majority, then B will have to be put in place." Mal.
User:Stubacca seems to be shouting (Good God!) a similar view. As previously stated, D isn't an option - Stu.
So can I merely assert calling the article about my COUNTRY by the title "RoI" is not an option? (Think of all the argument and hassle that would save!)
Excuse me while I chuckle, but this does not sound like like either democracy or consensus to me! ( Sarah777 21:48, 2 March 2007 (UTC))
Nor is Wiki here as a vehicle for your political pov. The consensus is obvious. We HAVE had a vote on whether we should have a flag in the infobox! Result: NO.
"if we have a vote at all" - I think you will find we have just had one.
"assuming it is agreed that we should have a flag..." Bizarre. We have just agreed NOT to have a flag. ( Sarah777 23:58, 2 March 2007 (UTC))
Nope. I definitely see a vote! What browser are you using? ( Sarah777 12:20, 3 March 2007 (UTC))
And another thing: please can we leave the flags as they are until we achieve some sort of consensus, or at least until it is clear that there are a majority in favour of removing/replacing them? If someone disputes that a consensus has been reached, it means that there is no consensus. Martin 17:58, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Can I just point out the WP is NOT a democracy. The purpose of a straw poll is not to define the consensus. It is to help editors see where a voluntary consensus might be drawn from. Frelke 19:00, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Sorry Martin, I cannot agree with your suggestion re 'leaving the flag' (Option A; outvoted consistently) OR with the alternative of the Union Jack (Option B - virtually no support). While this discussion continues the "status quo" is no flag in the infobox. Please don't engage in a revert war.
And if Wiki isn't a democracy, fine. But then policy must be whatever I say it is. So back to changing the RoI name; it being manifestly incorrect and an insult to my COUNTRY. ( Sarah777 01:10, 4 March 2007 (UTC))
Martin, I am aghast that you imply I am not 'playing by the rules'. You should support that with evidence or retract.
I am also aghast at your remark re the "RoI" issue that I am "not engaging with the actual issues"! I have written hundreds of words on the issue, debated all angles - frankly all I see in response is a)abuse and personal attacks b)accusations of Bad Faith and C) 'arguments that merely keep repeating that black is really white.
On the vote; are we to leave it open till people stop voting - or until the result changes? And what of the declared position of several pro-Banner editors who have announced IN ADVANCE that the vote can be ignored? I don't recall you chastising them.
There was a consensus and then it was rejected. It is this rejection we are currently voting on. (As for the English language - no chiding of "Mal" for saying that there is no vote?!) Also, the two most recent reversions by User:Panelcourt and User:Usualcoast - both clear Sockpuppets who reverted the edits by User:Padraig3uk and then mine. So were I to leave the current set-up I would be leaving some vandalism in place. As for what "others think", well, I may have views on what they think too you know.
My only aim here is to remove the pov that has become so ingrained in Ireland-related articles the minority of established editors can't even recognise it anymore. So obviously "my cause" will not find favour with the pov pushers. ( Sarah777 04:24, 4 March 2007 (UTC))
Dunno. Do you? Clearly they are socks though. Or something similar. They made up names solely to revert the Banner, did they not? ( Sarah777 14:05, 4 March 2007 (UTC))
Sarah777: "no chiding of "Mal" for saying that there is no vote?!" Perhaps you didn't noticed the tense that I used: "because we haven't voted on that issue yet".
You say: "My only aim here is to remove the pov that has become so ingrained in Ireland-related articles". But let's make two things clear. Firstly, this is specifically a Northern Ireland-related article, in case you hadn't noticed. Secondly, the encyclopedia is about fact... the fact is that there currently exist no flag which specifically represents Northern Ireland, other than the Northern Ireland flag.
Padraig, to address your point about replacing the Northern Irish flag with the Union Jack in the infobox... the creator of the straw poll made four options. I believe the four options should be reduced to three (A, B and C) because having an infobox with a blank space is not acceptable at all to me. Therefore, before we have a vote on A, B or C, I think we should have had a vote as to whether there should be a flag in the infobox or nothing. If the result is that there should be a flag, then a vote should commence on which particular flag (or symbol, in the case of the Assembly logo) it should be. -- Mal 07:35, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
The pure conjecture about a chain of edits that will lead to the "elimination" of the NI article is nonsense; - using such arguments one could assign any motive to any edit and hypothesise any string of FUTURE edits leading to any result.
Allowing arguments such as yours above would lead to complete chaos; and thus must be ruled out of order.
The fact that the box has a facility for inserting a flag is utterly irrelevant. I think you must seriously address your obvious inability to seperate you pov from your function as an editor. Regards ( Sarah777 01:04, 11 March 2007 (UTC))
having an infobox with a blank space is not acceptable at all to me - Mal. Oh dear, that's unfortunate, because having a flag is unacceptable to me.
There's no valid reason not to have a flag in the infobox. - AND no valid reason to have a flag either.
Eh..Mal. We HAVE HAD a vote. Result: no flag. It is becoming very difficult to assume 'good faith' when you deny what is clearly written on this page.
Every other country/state etc article has one. - Stu. So what? To quote Mal let's make two things clear. Firstly, this is specifically a Northern Ireland-related article, in case you hadn't noticed. Secondly, the encyclopedia is about fact... the fact is that there currently exists no flag which specifically represents Northern Ireland
So, I guess the only way to sort this is with a vote. Hold on...we HAD a vote. But some minority editors continue to try and push their pov on the regardless of the views of the community in general. ( Sarah777 21:33, 9 March 2007 (UTC))
[de-indent]Contrary to what you believe to be true, the facts support what I have said - there is no flag that represents Northern Ireland specifically, other than the Northern Ireland flag. The flag was designed for that purpose. Until either another flag it made in place of it, or Northern Ireland ceases to exist, the current Northern Ireland flag represents Northern Ireland. -- Mal 04:05, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
De facto is good enough in many, many other areas of Wikipedia.. and is actually essential at times with regard to UK-related subjects, considering its system of law. That the Northern Ireland flag is the flag that represents, specifically, Northern Ireland is and has been verified. It is not an opinion. -- Mal 04:05, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Dislike, commotion, disruption. Gotta hand it to you Mal you obviously think the rules governing 'no personal attacks' don't apply to you! Actually I think all three words describe your attitude and activity - plus paranoia - please show me where I have been trying to 'hide' NI (other than on this flag issue).
You won't find any example Mal. So I guess an apology and retraction are in order.
In case I haven't made myself clear, NO FLAG is the decision; the status quo. The current article having been protected by two sockpuppets. It is a measure of my immense patience and desire for compromise that I haven't engaged in an edit war. I call on you to cease your vexatious editing. ( Sarah777 08:49, 12 March 2007 (UTC))
Martin, I may have overstated my degree of aghastness; but I seriously believe (and I have read all the Wiki policies) that your take on the current state of consensus is mistaken. "No flag" is the status quo. Nor do I believe that the default is the UF; "no flag" is the default. You and some others may assertthat it is; the clear majority appear to feel differently. And if majority views are not consensus, and votes are only straw-polls then how come I am constantly referred to "consensus" and "the majority" in relation to the RoI article? There is a contradiction at the heart of your reasoning.
Nor have you addressed the question of the Sockpuppets who restored your (mistaken) version of the status quo or the vote pre-emption by several pro-Banner folk. (Not implying you had anything to do with the puppets; but their edits prevented me changing back under the 3RR). ( Sarah777 01:13, 5 March 2007 (UTC))
And you have no such suspicions? You see nothing odd about two new Users signing up within minutes of one another simply to revert the banner? No? And "no flag" is the status quo as I have explained before. After the initial discussion some weks back Padraig3uk declared the change to "no flag" agreed and the change was made. After this some small number of editors decided they wanted to change the status quo and add the banner to the infobox. You are not suggesting that Padraig3uk has no authority to declare consensus when it appeared clear at least 2/1 (never mind 3/2) had expressed in favour? And if Padraig3uk can't do that...who can? You? Ben? Sony? ( Sarah777 02:33, 5 March 2007 (UTC))
The
British Isles template has had some new functionality added arising from a discussion on the
Ireland talk page. The template can now be either inserted on a page as usual (i.e. {{British Isles}}
) or, depending on what the community of each article agree to, another title can be given to the template on a page-by-page basis (e.g. {{British Isles|Title Will Go Here}}
).
The consensus reached on the Ireland page was "Great Britain, Ireland & the Isle of Man", this is also being used on the Republic of Ireland page. On 'joint' pages, such as British Isles or British Isles (terminology), "The British Isles - or Great Britain, Ireland & the Isle of Man" is the being used at present.
I'm not involving myself in this business any further than just to let people know about it. If the community here want to change the title then the possibility exists.
(By way of a short explanation, the term "Great Britain, Ireland & the Isle of Man" was chosen on the Ireland page because it was the most politically neutral while still encompassing everyone that the term "British Isles" does.)
-- sony-youth 20:30, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
"Great Britain, Ireland & the Isle of Man" That's quite a mouthful alright. What a bunch of ridiculously enduglant PC rubbish. beano 23:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Agree with beano - we should simply say any reference to Ireland being part of the BRITISH Isles is forbidden on Wiki. In every article and in all contexts. As compromise does not seem to be the order of the day here anymore. ( Sarah777 23:13, 25 February 2007 (UTC))
We have a situation whereby their are three spoken languages and two sign languages listed as "Official language(s)". Is this just plainly correct or a pipe dream? Djegan 01:02, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Surely the six counties are a terrotory under military occupatoin. It is a territory and it is under military occupation. You don't see the army out on the streets in Britain. Derry Boi 13:18, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
As far as I am aware Northern Ireland is illegaly held. One may say that 'Oh, but, um, those Presbyterians and Anglicans are the majority and thus UK troops should be there to protect them!'. Bullshit. Give me one time in modern irish history when Protestants were hideously attacked to the point they needed the UK to come help? Yet, one can roll off the times Catholic lifes have been harmed. Why can the Gardai or Irish Army or even the UN not take the defence of the province? 3thought 22:25, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
So you're saying just because Scots came over and formed the majority it is rightly theirs? Surely, one would wthink, it is the land of the people who had it there at one time. Those people, oddly enough, are the Irish. As Paul McCartney said Give Ireland back to the Irish. I am a staunch supporter of the Belfast Agreement but would consider myself a Republican. For me it is just a matter of time until re-unification comes. In the mean time may peace reach Northern Ireland and bring democracy. My above comments were rash and taken in a sweep of a tad of wee anger. Apologies for the politik. Oh, and 'leave whenever thery're asked to'? I'm sorry, but thats a poor point. The SS could have stop killing if asked by authority as could pratically any other army (or part of). Of course they'll leave when asked...thats just, um, pure sense. 3thought 19:25, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
This is silly. Don't feed the troll. -- sony-youth talk 23:11, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
I agree with the majority of posters here. It is definitely not, by any sane and rational measure, under military occupation. In relation to this point, a debate on the history of settlement, invasion, etc., in Ireland is both pointless and fruitless. If you decide to go back in history to justify one opinion or the other, then where do you stop? Go back to before about 10,000B.C. and there was no human settlement. It doesn't help the debate and isn't relevant to the point. I think the only period that should be discussed is the present and it is clear that NI is not occupied by a foreign military force. And I don't think that anyone would disagree that it currently forms part of the UK, whatever their personal wishes and feelings on the rights, wrongs, etc. ELBBT 82.45.213.202 17:15, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
There are many countries in the new world where the indigenous peoples were dispossessed of their lands centuries ago.
Ireland is my home country!!!!!! I'm obsessed!
If anybody feels like replacing the map in the infobox with Image:Europe location N-IRL.png, feel free to do it. — Alex ( T| C| E) 06:59, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Between the passing of the Royal and Parliamentary Titles Act 1927 and the Ireland Act 1949, it seems that the title of the crown, with respect to Ireland (island), changed from 'King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland' to 'King of Great Britain' and separately 'King of Ireland'. Clearly, the King of Ireland title applied to the Irish Free State, commonwealth realm that it was, and the King was advised on matters for the King of Ireland by his free state ministers. However, are we also to understand that the King of Ireland was also king in Northern Ireland, but that in respect of his northern irish duties, he took advice from his Westminister ministers ? Or his Stormont ministers, through the Governor of Northern Ireland ? The alternative would be that the King of Great Britain was King within Northern Ireland during this period. That would, perhaps, make more sense as it is the current arrangement, but slightly odd, given that the title of the monarch at that time (as King of Great Britain, and not yet - until the 1949 act - King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland).
Does anyone know what the true position is here ?
Many thanks.-- 203.218.93.53 05:26, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
As always discussions re discrimination are a tricky subject and people tend to deal in black and white assertations that are not backed up by the evidence. I think user Sony-youth read my old edit...
"Some Unionists argue that any discrimination was not just because of religious or political bigotry, but also the result of more complex socio-economic, socio-political and geographical factors."
... as denying that discrimination occurred or indicating that some unionists hold that viewpoint. It was not, the key phrase being "was not just because of" and it does not deny discrimination occurred but is trying to indicate that it is a complex issue instead of the usual black and white analysis. I am sure some unionists are discrimination deniers, but that is not what I said. My point was that some unionists, CAIN says many and others, debate the nature and extent of discrimination. This is not the same as denying discrimination occured and is not discussed as a controversial viewpoint on CAIN etc. I would say not indicating that there is a debate over the nature and extent of discrimination is more controversial and only selectively representing the issues.
I quote from Whyte 1983 "The consensus among those who have looked at the evidence dispassionately is that the picture is neither black nor white, but a shade of grey."
The following quote from Majority-Minority Differentials: Unemployment, Housing and Health by Martin Melaugh Chapter 9 is also apt.
"Perhaps the most important consequence of this was the creation of a perception among the total Catholic population of a more widespread and systematic form of direct discrimination than the currently available evidence would support. Nevertheless, the Catholic allegations of discrimination by a number of local government districts, predominantly in the south and west of the region, were substantiated in many respects by later investigations (Cameron Report, 1969). There is also evidence that Catholics, in a few areas where they were in control of a local authority, discriminated against Protestants. As Catholics were less likely to be in a position to exercise such discrimination there was less of it; this is not in any way to excuse that discrimination which was carried out."[3]
The line.."Others believe that discrimination was a reality; David Trimble, the former First Minister of Northern Ireland, openly described Northern Ireland as having been a "cold house for Catholics" during the period.".. further indicates that my preceding sentence has been misunderstood and anyway Trimble's comments do not refute the fact that discrimination is a complex issue.
I have previously gone through this and would like to think those changing the paragraph will read it properly before getting hot under the collar.
-- Strangelyb 09:48, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
“ | Some Unionists argue that any discrimination was not just because of religious or political bigotry, but also the result of more complex socio-economic, socio-political and geographical factors. Others, such as former First Minister of Northern Ireland, David Trimble, openly described Northern Ireland as having been a "cold house for Catholics" during the period. | ” |
Thanks for the clarification Sony-youth. I do however think that though Trimble described NI as a cold house for Catholics this is not the same as him saying that discrimnation is not a complex issue. From my perspective it still appears to be trying to counteract a misunderstood viewpoint in the previous sentence. Anyway from my knowledge of Trimble's opinions he is one of the "Some Unionists" arguing for example that the Nationalist policy of abstaining from the workings of the nascent N.I state was a contributing factor. I had previously refrained from detailing the counter arguments (not neccessarily my own) to discrimination being only the result of bigotry, wholesale and solely by unionists because it would only attract hotheads and is probably better dealt with in a separate article. I think it is clearer as it stood. -- Strangelyb 11:27, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
I think these should be reworked.
The Towns and villages section is just a list. The Towns in Northern Ireland, Villages in Northern Ireland and List of places in Northern Ireland links should be moved to the See also section at the end, and the section removed.
The Places of interest section is again just a list. If the article is going to progress to a FA, lists are frowned upon. Some entries on the list are already covered elsewhere in the article, eg Mountains of Mourne and Lough Neagh. So there's no problem removing them. The sentences on them could be expanded though. Entries on the list that aren't covered elsewhere can be covered elsewhere.
And lastly the History section should be first as far as I know, ie after the lead. Thoughts? Stu ’Bout ye! 13:26, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
"Can we get away from questioning people's POV? I believe there have been some legitimate points raised on both sides, and these have not been addressed. Saying that people want to remove the Ulster Banner because they are Nationalists, or they want to keep it because they are Unionists is all very interesting I'm sure, but it has absolutely no bearing on the issue in question. Indeed, appeal to motive is a logical fallacy. Let's deal with the issues raised, instead of bickering about how POV everyone else is. Every single editor has a POV, but if we assume good faith and try to reach a consensus (and a consensus is more than the tyranny of the majority), it doesn't have to be to the determinant of the article. Martin 23:21, 25 February 2007 (UTC)"
I quote this above because the charge of "pov" is being thrown around like spaghetti at a wake. I ADMIT to having a pov; and also to accusing those who favour the 'status quo' of having a pov too. Which they manifestly have! For example; the majority 'vote' to accept option 'D' (no flag) is rejected because according one editor it is just a first step in an agenda to abolish the article on Northern Ireland. Clearly if we can't deal with the issues as presented but see perfectly reasonable claims/edits as part of some bigger agenda than ANYTHING can be questioned.
As my GOOD FAITH has been rubbished by several veteran contributors I will now take a ONE MONTH break from all issues relating to Irish naming disputes, including editing controversial articles, (bar Roads-related ones) in order to concentrate on what I feel I should be doing here. I will remain active and TRY to keep out of this - until 25th March 2007. Have a good time fighting folks! (If there is a VOTE on any of these issues I'll be back in a flash). Regards to all, and even to those who question my good faith - I don't question yours. ( Sarah777 00:23, 26 February 2007 (UTC))
Why do some articles on countries include a religion section and others not? Is this a matter of political correctness? More importantly, where is the section about Northern Ireland's religion? One of the main causes behind so much terrorism and "freedom - fighting" as the IRA would call it has occured is due to historical discrimination of Catholics in favor of Anglicans and to this day, Protestants and Catholics do not get along very well today. And no, I don't need to cite that fact, unless you've put a cardboard box on your heads every time BBC news came on from 1990's - 2000's . Tourskin 02:18, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Point of detail - "Anglicans" should read Protestant. Only a minority of protestants are "Anglican", and these days "Anglicans" [Church of Ireland] are usually associated with the liberal wing of Unionism .
Why is there no mention whatsoever in this article that Northern Ireland has its own legal system - Northern Ireland law - which is separate from English law (also applicable in Wales) or Scots law? I would have thought that that was rather fundamental information. -- Mais oui! 11:06, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Why would the mural be listed as in 'Derry' when the city itself (where the mural is located) is 'officially' and 'really' Londonderry? Bo 18:07, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
I've opened a straw poll on support for a change to the title of the Republic of Ireland article and related articles. -- sony-youth talk 21:28, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
I think it would be better to write
If we must use words like "claiming" (or portrayed) then I'd be happy with either version. What is important is that not just one side are represented as "claiming" anything unless the other is - the word may well be accurate but is definitely pejorative. ( Sarah777 01:29, 24 March 2007 (UTC))
Primarily political I would say; the issue of Unionist monopoly of power, discrimination in allocating jobs and houses etcetera. And the issue of British backing of the Unionist regime in Stormont which Nationalists wanted abolished. "Nationalists happen to be of one sect and Unionists of the other, but the conflict is primarily an ethnic one." Nationalism is a political position, not a ethnicity. Ditto Unionism. This was a political dispute, between Nationalists who were mainly Catholic and Unionists plus the British Government (who are mainly Protestant) on the other side. ( Sarah777 18:12, 24 March 2007 (UTC))
I heard on the news right now, that tonight, Great Britain will offically not rule Northen Ireleand any more. Any have any sources on that? → Aza Toth 06:45, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Great Britain never ruled Northern Ireland to begin with AzaToth. -- Mal 20:20, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello fellow editors. A straw poll has opened today (27th March 2007) regarding the use of flags on the United Kingdom place infoboxes. There are several potential options to use, and would like as many contrubutors to vote on which we should decide upon. The straw poll is found here. If joining the debate, please keep a cool head and remain civil. We look forward to seeing you there. Jhamez84 11:39, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Well, that's what the Unionist community wants, isn't it?! ( Sarah777 08:10, 28 March 2007 (UTC))
Someone replaced the entire NI article with the single word "poops"; that was reverted and then user User:Psyche825 reverted the whole article back to "poops" - 'using popups':
(Revert to revision 118424627 dated 2007-03-28 02:25:14 by 75.67.23.163 using popups)
How does this happen? ( Sarah777 02:57, 28 March 2007 (UTC))
The main article is now locked. Should we seek mediation or arbitration to resolve the dispute? Or is this an indication that one has already been chosen?-- ZincBelief 14:30, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
If you check the article history you'll see the flag/crest in the infobox for over a year. Maybe earlier, I haven't checked that far back. I'm not refusing to accept anything, no consensus, agreement or decision has been reached padraig. Stu ’Bout ye! 15:00, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Arbcom's not going to resolve a content dispute for you. While it might hand out some suspensions and probations for general jackassery perpetrated during the dispute, they won't hand down a decision on which flag should go there. That's left up to the editors who actually work on the page. Mediation's a better bet. ShaleZero 16:50, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
There is a dispute about whether or not the infobox should contain a flag.16:00, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Comment If there is no current flag, then no.-- Zleitzen (talk) 16:56, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
"brave heroes "? - surely you mean terrorists or are you just spouting a POV ?
If there is no flag for NI then there is no flag for NI. If there was one 35 years ago then that's when it was - 35 years ago. Normally this would mean that NI "simply has no flag" and so leaving it out of the infobox would be most appropriate. However, given the circumstances of the last 35 years, its hardly the case that NI "simply has no flag" - "simply" is a problem just for a start. It had a flag, the reasons why that flag is no longer official are legion, but like all other constituents in the UK, NI (in theory) can, and should, bear a flag, and it will probably again in time. Until then, the Ulster banner should be used in the infobox as a "former" flag, with specific dates, and the coat of arm displayed similarly. This is simply neutral and factual. However, to claim that the Ulster banner is currently the flag of NI would not be so.
Much more clear is that the Union Flag is not a flag of NI, it is the flag of the UK - to display it in the infobox as the flag of NI is unfactual and misleading. The union flag simply and plainly does not represent NI, it represents the state that NI is a constituent member of. -- sony-youth talk 22:18, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Comment Placing the flag in the infobox would be misleading in that other similar articles have current flags in the infobox. If, however, the flag has historical interest I would suggest it could be included elsewhere in the article as a former flag in the interest of compromise. Inseeisyou 12:58, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Comment: If the flag stopped being official in 1972, then it should not appear in the infobox, but it should appear in a section. Current treatment of flags seems OK as it is now. Randroide 12:50, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Comment: If the Union Banner is not an official flag any longer, don't use it in the infobox; if no official flag exists, don't use one at all. We note that the Union Jack is in fact the official overarching flag of the sovereign entity, yet like the Union Banner itself is a political PoV statement to many, so don't use it either, per WP:NPOV. Ergo use no flag, unless/until such time as N.I. has its own official flag again. The U.B. has historical significance, so use it in the article, clearly captioned as to its applicability, and link to Flag of Northern Ireland for further explanation with {{ main}} (or otherwise). Pretty simple really. U.B. should not be used in icon form, e.g. in general lists/tables relating to countries, nor in individuals' infoboxes, for PoV reasons. But because it does have official saction for sporting purposes among sport governing bodies, ranging from football to snooker, and there is no cited evidence that this usage is perceived as a political statement (unlike general civic usage which Flag of Northern Ireland and reliable external sources say is a uniformly Unionist partisan message), it is appropriate to use the U.B. icon in tables and lists of sport stats/results (but not in players' infoboxes, since its use is only appropriate for their professional role as sportspeople representing N.I., not as a symbol for them as people in general, where it implies Unionism for many readers, an implication that in many cases will be factually incorrect.) The "Nationality" line of their infobox should simply read "[[Northern Ireland|Northern Irish]]", with no flag icon. — SMcCandlish [ talk] [ cont ‹(-¿-)› 00:15, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Wouldn't it be obvious to have the Union Flag in the flag space and above it saying Northern Ireland no longer has a flag of its own but is covered by the Union Flag as part of the UK, which is actually closest to the truth and has no bias.
Nope. Not consistent with the consensus or with the other UK countries. Someone said the new Assembly (incoming, hopefully) has a flag. If so, why not use that? ( Sarah777 20:02, 6 April 2007 (UTC))
All the other countries in the UK have a flag, it is inconsistant for Wiki and the UK for not have a flag in the Info box. The Union Flag should be used. -- Cka4004 21:30, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
The Union Flag is actually the flag which should be used because it's the only flag Northern Ireland has used since the 70s and is the only flag Northern Ireland uses to this day. Wikipedia can't use a predicted flag as it's part of Wiki policy that Wikipedia only displays what is fact at present, and the fact is at present that Northern Ireland no longer has a Home Country flag but still uses the Union Flag as being part of the UK. The Assembly logo is only a proposed logo and isn't even a flag. It seems very odd not having a flag as is more inconsistant not having a flag and would be more consistant using the Union Flag. As for consensus it's used as a tool to try to stop people changing the article away from how someone else wanted it so when someone changes something which seems wrong the person who liked it how it was before will tell them no you can't because you don't have consensus. If there are enough like minded editors trying to reach a consensus on a page they could agree on something which is completely wrong like that Northern Ireland is really governed by Dolphins, putting consensus between editors over what is actually fact is one of the major well known faults of Wikipedia. It seems to me and to many others that some people such as Sarah777 who hold pro-Nationalist views won't abide by the WP:NPOV because they won't accept anything less than making Northern Ireland seem like a shared sovereignty province between the UK and Republic of Ireland and so can't really be reasoned with nor will they ever completely abide by Wiki policies nor ever take a truely neutral POV and when they don't get their way they'll just find a sympathetic Administrator to protect the page with their edits in effect. In all it's almost impossible to keep this article just displaying the facts because there are too many Nationalists trying to make it look like Northern Ireland is in some way a part of the Republic of Ireland and it's high time we who just want the facts being told took this article back. 88.109.10.175 22:21, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Also on the stupid idea of using the EU flag instead I mean what is that? That's a ridiculous idea dreamt up as another way of desperately keeping the Union Flag off this article. I think you'll find Northern Ireland is more a part of the UK than the EU. This article is in serious risk of been seen as plain stupid in that it gets to a point where the article is just not in touch with reality anymore. 88.109.10.175 22:25, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Sarah, in a choice between using the Ulster Banner and not using the Ulster Banner, not using the Ulster Banner is not a compromise - at least no moreso than keeping the flag with the addition of a notice below stating it is no longer official, which I believe was there until the recent edit war. Also, our anonymous friend above did not tell you you were stupid, he said you had a stupid idea re the EU flag. While he's not far off the money, although disingenuous might been a better term than stupid. You may have been being sincere with the Assembly "flag" but the Assembly does not have a flag, just a corporate logo. There's a world of difference. beano 23:30, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Pages like Guadeloupe, Martinique or Saint-Pierre-et-Miquelon have unofficial flags as well as flags that can best be described as corresponding to a legislative or executive body, since they are described as "region flags", and "region" is simply a very prosaic administrative term. Using the Assembly logo seems like a good idea, as it's as close as you can come to something official. But I think the Ulster Banner, since it is still used to represent Northern Ireland in sports, at least, should also be included. (This is important since foreigners unfamiliar with the flag are likely to encounter it in this context.) I suppose a good caption for that flag would be Official flag (1953-1972) with a footnote still sometimes used unofficially especially in sport and in Unionist communities. I don't think the Union Flag is a good idea, since that would be inflammatory for a part of the Northern Ireland population, to a much greater extent, I would presume, than the Ulster Banner. I would like to point out that the fact that the Union Flag is flown on some official occasions is not a conclusive argument that it should be included, since it appears to be used officially solely as a sort of symbol of royal authority or central government authority. In Canada, the Union Flag is officially the "Royal Flag" and has some limited uses in connection with the monarchy and also on occasions honouring past military action by Canada, since Canada fought under that flag as late as the Second World War, with it technically being considered a symbol of Canada rather than the UK. Of course, these uncommon official uses of the Royal Flag do not mean that it is ordinarily seen as a symbol of Canada. Like Northern Ireland, Canada was divided on the use of a symbol connected with Britain, and the Union Flag has seldom been seen since the mid-60s. In any case, I think appropriate capions can make it clear, if necessary, what the status of the various flags is. Joeldl 08:33, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
I think everyone can agree that there is no official flag. If everyone agrees to this, then the info box should reflect it, i.e. No Official Flag. Dose Wikipedia policies dictate that a flag has to be inserted, were no official flag exists? I would not think so. The article itself will explain the reason for this. Regards -- Domer48 18:54, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't think anyone is denying that the Ulster Banner is used by groups and individuals to represent Northern Ireland, and as such whether the IFA use it or not is irrelevant. It would only be relevant to the debate if some were contending that the Ulster Banner is never used by anyone, anywhere, ever. I see enough mindless thugs putting it up on lampposts at this time of year to know that it is still used by many. The IFA is not Wikipedia, and vice versa. The IFA do not have to follow Wikipedia rules and guidelines, and so whether they use the flag or not is a complete non sequitur. Martin 17:16, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Surely it's relevant when considering the argument that while the flag is not official, it is used to represent Northern Ireland (in most of the few sports where Northern Ireland is distinctly represented) and is therefore a de facto and/or unofficial flag. beano 18:51, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
It is very clear that the article should not be unblocked as it will lead to an immediate resumption of an edit war. We really must look for a Third Way (as the British and NI Prime Minister would say!). I suggest (1) The Assembly logo; (2) failing agreement to that the EU flag, which I think no reasonable person can object to. Look at it - beautiful, is it not? ( Sarah777 21:37, 7 April 2007 (UTC))
Sarah777, the EU Flag is not a option.-- padraig3uk 21:50, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
And why not?? ( Sarah777 22:00, 7 April 2007 (UTC))
And why is either the EU or UN flag a better choice than the Union Flag? Martin 00:27, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
In country articles, the location map of this David Liuzzo design obtains a map caption (here simplified):
Location of X (orange)
on the
European continent (white) — [Legend]
or
Location of X (orange)
- on the
European continent (camel and white)
- in the
European Union (camel) — [Legend]
The colours of the areas are further explained on a linked [Legend], which is specific for the EU (or maps without the 'camel' colour the Legend preserves for it) and cannot serve for Northern Ireland. In this case, the normal parameters for "map_caption" in the infobox, would not render a proper result either. I prepared a map_caption that exactly follows the syntax otherwise produced by the template, it renders this text when actually passed to the Infobox of the Northern Ireland article:
the
United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern Ireland (camel and orange respectively),
and of this
UK on the
European continent (white)
In case this is found acceptable, copy [from this read-out screen, not from edit mode] this next part and paste it into the article in edit mode (when not protected) underneath the line: |image_map = Europe location N-IRL.png
|map_caption = <div style="text-align:center;font-size:11px;line-height:1.15em;"><!-- --><span style="font-size:11px;">Location of <span style="font-size:2px;"> </span>[[Northern Ireland]] <!-- --><span style="font-size:2px;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"> </span></span>(<span style="font-size:9px;">orange</span>) <!-- -->in, officially,</span><p style="width:250px;font-size:11px;margin-top:0px;margin-bottom:0px;line-height:1.15em;">''the <!-- -->[[United Kingdom|United Kingdom of Great Britain and<br/>Northern Ireland]]'' <!-- --><span style="font-size:8px;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"> </span></span>(<span style="font-size:9px;">camel and <!-- -->orange respectively</span>),<br />and of this [[United Kingdom|UK]] on the [[Europe|European <!-- -->continent]] <span style="font-size:4px;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"> </span></span><!-- -->(<span style="font-size:9px;">white</span>)</p></div>
A simpeler "United Kingdom" would be possible, but here the official full name is more informative. Kind regards. — SomeHuman 8 Apr 2007 22:48 (UTC)
Why is the European Union not included on the "location map"? (
Sarah777
23:01, 8 April 2007 (UTC))
NI used to be described by the BBC and others as 'the province', ( although nationalists thought that it was only part of a province, namely 'Ulster'!)
Now we get the likes of the 'Nolan Show' on BBC Ulster using the tern 'country' to describe NI. We even have a debate over the location of a 'National(sic) Stadium'.
When will unionists ever grow up and come to terms with the fact that NI is neither a 'province' nor a 'country' but just a part of the island of Ireland? Big Ian mentioned our two countries when he recently shook hands with the 'Irish Prime Minister' (sic),,,but then maybe he was referring to the UK and Ireland! Lughlamhfhada 09:56, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Thats true, but as it is not physically joining the rest of the UK it is more appropriate to call it province, rather than country due to the complex nature of the UK's construction. -- Cka4004 20:09, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
( Sarah777 19:30, 11 April 2007 (UTC))
I am not trying to dispute NI's status as a country, but simply trying to explain why it is somtimes known as the province in relation to the rest of the UK due to its status of being located on the Island of Ireland and not on the Island of Britain along side the other countries of the UK. Politically when I say Ireland I do of course mean Republic of Ireland. But culturally and in sport I refer to Ireland as one land, or island. -- Cka4004 19:46, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
"the UK is a country, but "Ireland" is merely an island. - Mal." So, you are saying that you didn't actually mean what you wrote? That style of writing would indeed cause comprehension difficulties! ( Sarah777 23:24, 11 April 2007 (UTC))
I thought/hoped that the standard of debate over this issue would be thought provoking ...at least past 11+ standard, but sadly the apologists for unionism have yet again failed to deliver.
If you were born in Ireland you are Irish by nationality ( natare = to be born). You may claim Irish or British Citizenship ( or even both) of course ( see the Belfast Agreement) but this still leaves you Irish.
If Ireland is your country of birth ( north, south, east and west of Ireland) then it matters little whether you saw the first light of day north or south of the border.
Describing Northern Ireland as a country is to misuse the term, given that there is no such thing as a Northern Ireland 'nationality'. ( There is no Armagh nationality either of course!)
The fact that northern protestant unionists are Irish of course does not diminish their rights to claim British Citizenship nor should it diminish their loyality to the Crown.
What seems to me to be a pointless debate is the harping on an on ad nauseam about a flag for Norhtern Ireland or other trappings of 'nationhood', when the dogs in the street all know that this the stuff of dunderheads.
Big Ian in his speech in Dublin recently alluded to his Ulsterness and his Irishness. so maybe this bogeyman will soon be laid finally to rest! Lughlamhfhada 21:06, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
10:32, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Thats true, but as it is not physically joining the rest of the UK it is more appropriate to call it province, rather than country due to the complex nature of the UK's construction. -- Cka4004 20:09, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
( Sarah777 19:30, 11 April 2007 (UTC))
I am not trying to dispute NI's status as a country, but simply trying to explain why it is somtimes known as the province in relation to the rest of the UK due to its status of being located on the Island of Ireland and not on the Island of Britain along side the other countries of the UK. Politically when I say Ireland I do of course mean Republic of Ireland. But culturally and in sport I refer to Ireland as one land, or island. -- Cka4004 19:46, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
"the UK is a country, but "Ireland" is merely an island. - Mal." So, you are saying that you didn't actually mean what you wrote? That style of writing would indeed cause comprehension difficulties! ( Sarah777 23:24, 11 April 2007 (UTC))
I thought/hoped that the standard of debate over this issue would be thought provoking ...at least past 11+ standard, but sadly the apologists for unionism have yet again failed to deliver.
If you were born in Ireland you are Irish by nationality ( natare = to be born). You may claim Irish or British Citizenship ( or even both) of course ( see the Belfast Agreement) but this still leaves you Irish.
If Ireland is your country of birth ( north, south, east and west of Ireland) then it matters little whether you saw the first light of day north or south of the border.
Describing Northern Ireland as a country is to misuse the term, given that there is no such thing as a Northern Ireland 'nationality'. ( There is no Armagh nationality either of course!)
The fact that northern protestant unionists are Irish of course does not diminish their rights to claim British Citizenship nor should it diminish their loyality to the Crown.
What seems to me to be a pointless debate is the harping on an on ad nauseam about a flag for Norhtern Ireland or other trappings of 'nationhood', when the dogs in the street all know that this the stuff of dunderheads.
Big Ian in his speech in Dublin recently alluded to his Ulsterness and his Irishness. so maybe this bogeyman will soon be laid finally to rest! Lughlamhfhada 21:06, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, Beano should re-read my article, for he evidently is confused. It was Big Ian who said 'our two countries' not me! As regards my having a 'fundamental lack of understanding of the problem', maybe Beano will come back to debate this observation and what he terms the 'problem'?
Ireland has for a long time been partitioned ( see other examples like Cyprus or Kashmir). We therefore live under seperate jurisdictions or states, one being the UK and the other Ireland ( or the 'Republic of Ireland' as it is described). The six counties of Northern ireland which remain in the UK are of course still part of Ireland and the people who were born, lived or died there, are Irish by nationality and have a right to claim Irish, British ( or both) citizenship.( see Belfast Agreement).
They can't claim English or Scottish nationality because they were not born in these countries, nor can you claim English or Scottish citizenship because no such thing exists ( unfortunately!).
Nationality involves many things but in order to advance this debate I would like to raise the question of the use ( or misuse) of the term 'mainland'.
The 'Isle of Wight' is an English island and county, off the southern English coast, to the south of the county of Hampshire.' It is taken for granted that if one is born in the 'Isle of Wight' that England is the your 'mainland'. Of course England has become part of a larger political entity, the UK and the EU. We could envisage someone born on this island referring to either of these larger entities as 'the mainland', but I would suggest that this is improbable.
if you visit 'Rathlin island' you will notice that the islanders refer to the island of Ireland as the mainland. Go down to the harbour and ask a boatman to bring you to the mainland and you will be brought to north Antrim not the west of Scotland to to mainland Britain( sic). It is therefore rediculous, if somewhat amusing, to hear some presumably insecure or confused unionist referring to Great Britain as the 'mainland' instead of his own country, 'Ireland'. Lughlamhfhada 11:10, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Someone has screwed up this section. Lots of repetition of the cut'n'paste sort. Lughlamhfhada - you are the prime suspect! "The Mainland", from a Dublin perspective - if it isn't where we are already are then it's that place where Paris and Brussels are located. ( Sarah777 15:50, 22 April 2007 (UTC))
What's more, this section appears to be entirely a political troll. What constructive points relevant to the article are actually mentioned here? I don't see the point of it. -- ZincBelief 16:01, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Indeed, what is the point of anything? But is this the place to engage in philosophical debate? Surely we should stick to the subject, which is....Our Wee Country. And 'troll' is such negative word, Zinc. ( Sarah777 16:13, 22 April 2007 (UTC))
{{ Editprotected}}
This article contains incorrect and misleading information. In its infobox at the top of the article, it is claimed that Northern Ireland is "Currently without a National Flag". In actuality, the country does have a flag (as shown on the right), so this statement is in error. Equally, the countries England, Scotland and Wales can be said to currently be without a national flag. All countries however, also share the national flag known as the Union Jack. This renders the current statement in the infobox completely inaccurate and, in fact, a nonsense.
The protection template states: "This page is currently protected from editing until disputes have been resolved. Protection is not an endorsement of the current version (protection log)." However, clearly the current setup is completely in support of the few who have a particular political agenda (as opposed to respecting the de facto situation), and the previous edit protection states also supported this particular point of view. No edit protection freezes I have witnessed have frozen the article the way it had stood for the longest uninterrupted period - that the Flag of Northern Ireland was included in the infobox.
Further, the disputed issue was in regard to the Flag of Northern Ireland, but it appears that someone has also removed the coat of arms, which had not been in dispute.
Either some other edit should be made which presents a correct picture regarding the issue, as opposed to a completely false suggestion, or the flag of Northern Ireland that had been part of the article for the longest time (barring a couple of interruptions) should be restored forthwith.
It is a ridiculous state of affairs that an encyclopedia presents incorrect information to its readers. -- Mal 19:37, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
However Padraig, the Ulster Banner is the best known symbol as a flag to represent NI at present, and is seen across hundreds of Wiki pages as a symbol to show a person from Northern Ireland's nationality, or the location of a number of different artifacts and places of world stature. such as on the page of [[Ikea ]] in their list of stores section. -- Cka4004 19:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Agree (with edit request): The page should at least be edited to remove <big>[[Northern Ireland flags issue|Currently without a National Flag]]</big>
from the infobox's native_name
field. The flag field can just be left blank as it is now, but the phrase placed where it is is clearly a POV edit (why else the <big>
tag? why put it in the native_name
field?) and is the basis of one side of the current debate. Its presence there is likely to cause offence/more trouble/less likelihood of actually resolving this spat. Aside from that it also looks ugly and is unnecessary. --
sony-youth
talk
21:07, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
<tr><td colspan="3" style="line-height:1.2em; text-align:center;"><big>[[Northern Ireland flags issue|Currently without a National Flag]]</big></td></tr>
- disgraceful edit, whoever made it. --
sony-youth
talk
21:11, 11 April 2007 (UTC)There does not seem to be clear consensus to make the edit. I have disabled the tag. If consensus does develop, please feel free to add the tag again. CMummert · talk 01:06, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
{{
editprotected}}
OK, my point for agreeing with the edit request seems to have been lost in the issue of restoring the flag or not. As a new edit request, I don't want to restore the flag, but to make an edit to remove <tr><td colspan="3" style="line-height:1.2em; text-align:center;"><big>[[Northern Ireland flags issue|Currently without a National Flag]]</big></td></tr>
from the infobox's native_name
field. This is the only edit I wish to make and should be seen as a seperate issue as to whether or not there should be a flag/coat of arms in the infobox. The code is an artificial insertion to the infobox, looks ugly and is unnecessary whether it is true or not. --
sony-youth
talk
08:59, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Rather than making statements directed towards an admin, you will have to discuss the issue with the other involved editors to find any consensus. Since this text seems to be part of the dispute for which the page was protected, I don't believe it would be appropriate to change it until the dispute is resolved. This is not an endorsement of the current content; it's a general policy to minimize the amount of editing done to protected pages. CMummert · talk 13:32, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
<BIG>
tag) in the infobox. Could we just have it back to how it was at the time of being protected? --
sony-youth
talk
13:41, 12 April 2007 (UTC)Now that the issue above is sorted can we now find a solution, so that we can have the article un-protected and we can get on with improving the article.-- padraig3uk 15:35, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
A possible short term fix may be
This approach does have flaws (eg removing the template), however the flags issue is horrendious and could last for years, while the rest of the article stagnates. It does require people to have a bit of sense(sic) and realise that the protected template is not to be altered. 86.12.249.63 17:19, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Anthem:
God Save the Queen Londonderry Air ( de facto) | |
![]() Location of Northern Ireland/Archive 5 (orange) – in
Europe (tan & white) | |
Capital and largest city |
Belfast 54°35.456′N 5°50.4′W / 54.590933°N 5.8400°W |
Official languages | English ( de facto), Irish, Ulster Scots3 |
Government | Constitutional monarchy |
•
Queen | Queen Elizabeth II |
Tony Blair MP | |
office suspended | |
office suspended | |
Peter Hain MP | |
Establishment | |
1920 | |
Area | |
• Total | 13,843 km2 (5,345 sq mi) |
Population | |
• 2004 estimate | 1,710,300 |
• 2001 census | 1,685,267 |
• Density | 122/km2 (316.0/sq mi) |
GDP ( PPP) | 2002 estimate |
• Total | US$33.2 billion |
• Per capita | US$19,603 |
Currency | Pound sterling ( GBP) |
Time zone | UTC0 (GMT) |
• Summer (
DST) | UTC+1 (BST) |
Calling code | 445 |
ISO 3166 code | GB-NIR |
Internet TLD | .uk4 |
|
I am who suggested to User:Mysid change the template. Someone have created a Infobox only for Northern Ireland and it was redundant. I only changed from Template:Infobox UK N-Ireland to a general country Template:Infobox Country, without change nothing in content, as I made in others UK constituent countries ( England, Wales and Scotland). So, I suggest to modify the Infobox here and in the future request to admin move to the article. Guilherme Paula 00:03, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Just a question - the flag and arms were granted to the Government of NI, not to NI itself, correct? -- sony-youth talk 19:33, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Sony-youth, that is correct the flag ceased to be offical when the government was disolved, the coat of arms issue is different as they are in limbo status, and could be brought be back into offical use if a future NI government requested it.-- padraig3uk 20:03, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
If their is no national flag, the info box should reflect this. Regards--
Domer48
19:41, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
The Ascension Island has no flag because it simply has no national flag, that is all, just like Northern Ireland, and in its place the flag of the Union of the UK is used, just like in Northern Ireland. -- Cka4004 15:33, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
I presume that the use of this emblem in Wiki projects should be stopped, as there is in fact no flag representing NI? ( Sarah777 15:35, 15 April 2007 (UTC))
By clicking on a map of NI, there are infact nearly 1000 or more pages in wiki that use the Ulster banner, as a flag to represent Northern Ireland, as a map of Northern Ireland has no official status at all I have changed some to a mini flag of the Union jack and simply writing Northern Ireland, UK. in replacement, as the Union Jack is the only offical flag for Northern Ireland. By the way 88.111.203.121 is me, I just hadn't logged on by Accident. However much people dislike it, until a replacement the Ulster Banner will be the best known symbol of Northern Ireland. This would appear to be reflected within Wiki as they use it all the time across so many pages. -- Cka4004 15:52, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
{{editprotected}} Please fix this page it look terrible cant it just be protected ?? ( Gnevin 22:07, 3 May 2007 (UTC))
I doubt this is a "non-political" alternative to the clear majority supporting "no flag", but if accepted it would of course mean that in the example I have supplied above the Ulster Banner would need to be replaced by the Union Jack. ( Sarah777 15:40, 15 April 2007 (UTC))
NIShape.gif
Anthem:
God Save the Queen Londonderry Air ( de facto) | |
![]() Location of Northern Ireland/Archive 5 (orange) – in
Europe (tan & white) | |
Capital and largest city |
Belfast 54°35.456′N 5°50.4′W / 54.590933°N 5.8400°W |
Official languages | English ( de facto), Irish, Ulster Scots3 |
Government | Constitutional monarchy |
•
Queen | Queen Elizabeth II |
Tony Blair MP | |
office suspended | |
office suspended | |
Peter Hain MP | |
Establishment | |
1920 | |
Area | |
• Total | 13,843 km2 (5,345 sq mi) |
Population | |
• 2004 estimate | 1,710,300 |
• 2001 census | 1,685,267 |
• Density | 122/km2 (316.0/sq mi) |
GDP ( PPP) | 2002 estimate |
• Total | US$33.2 billion |
• Per capita | US$19,603 |
Currency | Pound sterling ( GBP) |
Time zone | UTC0 (GMT) |
• Summer (
DST) | UTC+1 (BST) |
Calling code | 445 |
ISO 3166 code | GB-NIR |
Internet TLD | .uk4 |
|
Anthem:
God Save the Queen Londonderry Air ( de facto) | |
![]() Location of Northern Ireland/Archive 5 (orange) – in
Europe (tan & white) | |
Capital and largest city |
Belfast 54°35.456′N 5°50.4′W / 54.590933°N 5.8400°W |
Official languages | English ( de facto), Irish, Ulster Scots3 |
Government | Constitutional monarchy |
•
Queen | Queen Elizabeth II |
Tony Blair MP | |
office suspended | |
office suspended | |
Peter Hain MP | |
Establishment | |
1920 | |
Area | |
• Total | 13,843 km2 (5,345 sq mi) |
Population | |
• 2004 estimate | 1,710,300 |
• 2001 census | 1,685,267 |
• Density | 122/km2 (316.0/sq mi) |
GDP ( PPP) | 2002 estimate |
• Total | US$33.2 billion |
• Per capita | US$19,603 |
Currency | Pound sterling ( GBP) |
Time zone | UTC0 (GMT) |
• Summer (
DST) | UTC+1 (BST) |
Calling code | 445 |
ISO 3166 code | GB-NIR |
Internet TLD | .uk4 |
|
Anthem:
God Save the Queen Londonderry Air ( de facto) | |
![]() Location of Northern Ireland/Archive 5 (orange) – in
Europe (tan & white) | |
Capital and largest city |
Belfast 54°35.456′N 5°50.4′W / 54.590933°N 5.8400°W |
Official languages | English ( de facto), Irish, Ulster Scots3 |
Government | Constitutional monarchy |
•
Queen | Queen Elizabeth II |
Tony Blair MP | |
office suspended | |
office suspended | |
Peter Hain MP | |
Establishment | |
1920 | |
Area | |
• Total | 13,843 km2 (5,345 sq mi) |
Population | |
• 2004 estimate | 1,710,300 |
• 2001 census | 1,685,267 |
• Density | 122/km2 (316.0/sq mi) |
GDP ( PPP) | 2002 estimate |
• Total | US$33.2 billion |
• Per capita | US$19,603 |
Currency | Pound sterling ( GBP) |
Time zone | UTC0 (GMT) |
• Summer (
DST) | UTC+1 (BST) |
Calling code | 445 |
ISO 3166 code | GB-NIR |
Internet TLD | .uk4 |
|
Anthem:
God Save the Queen Londonderry Air ( de facto) | |
![]() Location of Northern Ireland/Archive 5 (orange) – in
Europe (tan & white) | |
Capital and largest city |
Belfast 54°35.456′N 5°50.4′W / 54.590933°N 5.8400°W |
Official languages | English ( de facto), Irish, Ulster Scots3 |
Government | Constitutional monarchy |
•
Queen | Queen Elizabeth II |
Tony Blair MP | |
office suspended | |
office suspended | |
Peter Hain MP | |
Establishment | |
1920 | |
Area | |
• Total | 13,843 km2 (5,345 sq mi) |
Population | |
• 2004 estimate | 1,710,300 |
• 2001 census | 1,685,267 |
• Density | 122/km2 (316.0/sq mi) |
GDP ( PPP) | 2002 estimate |
• Total | US$33.2 billion |
• Per capita | US$19,603 |
Currency | Pound sterling ( GBP) |
Time zone | UTC0 (GMT) |
• Summer (
DST) | UTC+1 (BST) |
Calling code | 445 |
ISO 3166 code | GB-NIR |
Internet TLD | .uk4 |
|
As has been pointed out before the Union Banner represents England, Scotland, Wales and N Ireland as one Union, it dosent present then as individual parts.-- padraig3uk 15:51, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Sarah, I understand what your saying, but we have been over this already. I have removed the second infobox from here it is not necessary for this discussion.-- padraig3uk 17:08, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
I am sorry Paidrag, but the substance of this part of the article which I started requires the provision of a sample infobox to show my opinion on the situation, which everyone has their right to do. -- Cka4004 18:12, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
In response to Vintagekits, Northern Ireland is not a county or city, and the Union Jack is the only official flag for the country, it has priority as the flag of the UK, but as NI has no national flag the Union Jack is the only official flag for Northern Ireland, as stated in the Belfast Agreement. For the info box to say NI has no flag is not true, especially when the rest of Wikipedia has been using and continues to use the Ulster Banner as a flag for Northern Ireland on almost 1000 different pages. -- Cka4004 18:16, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Quoting Guilherme Paula from above in sub heading sugesting new info box. ' So, I suggest to modify the Infobox here and in the future request to admin move to the article. Guilherme Paula 00:03, 13 April 2007 (UTC)' -- Cka4004 18:19, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Cka4004, the reason why
Guilherme Paula provided the code for the infobox is because of this
Talk:Northern_Ireland#Short_term_fix discussion. It wasn't so that we could restart the whole discussion again fron last October, the concencus is to remove all flags from the infobox, the code was provided so that we could make it into a template and then request an admin to protect that template and place it on the article so that the article itself can be unprotected so that we can edit it.--
padraig3uk
19:22, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Well why didnt Guilherme say that then? as when I read it, it is clear that the template is so we can edit it and then ask admin to upload our edited version if agreed upon to the main page. -- Cka4004 19:36, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
The intended discussion here is to see if people are happy with the wording about the flag or wether we should remove the wording.-- padraig3uk 19:45, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
For the several people who still care enough to follow this debate, for reference it might be useful to look at the Kosovo infobox which has no official flag. 86.156.2.227 22:27, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Padraig, this page is for discussion about any issue relating to the Northern Ireland page, and anyone can write anything they want about that issue. I have placed an alternative infobox to the one currently on the NI page, and will be contacting Admin shortly, in acordance with what Guilherme said in their above article, on this alternative infobox, showing the Official flag of Northern Ireland, not an Infobox which has no flag and is derogitory to the article and misleading to the public. -- Cka4004 22:32, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
The Kosovo page is interesting however has nothing todo with the UK or her sister countries. -- Cka4004 22:32, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
How about the other info box for an alternative? the NI outline looks well. -- Cka4004 22:53, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Now that I have seen how well the small 6 counties of Northern Ireland looks on the pages I have seen, I think it would be a suitable logo for NI across Wikipedia and in the Infobox of the Northern Ireland page. -- Cka4004 23:01, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Agree. The map looks good, and is clearly recognisable in both the Country Infobox and as the small symbol for NI in other articles. being it looks so well and appears so neutral I assume everybody on both sides will ridicule the idea!! I support the proposal to use the map. In fact the Assembly should probably adopt it as the new flag; set in an orange background! ( Sarah777 00:06, 16 April 2007 (UTC))
I don't think the image is trying to portray NI as an island, just it is a very nice image and looks very well when used as a small icon to represent NI across all pages in Wiki and in the infobox of the NI page. Gaillimh people in NI are not automatically Irish Citizens, they are however automatically British on the day their birth cirtificate is signed, as a child born in any other part of the UK. It is Irish citizenship that is optional, and people may chose to take it up or maybe chose both as many do, to enjoy the benifits of British Nationality while expressing a wish to enjoy Irish Citizenship as well .-- Cka4004 14:42, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I also support the proposal to use the green NI map as the logo for Northern Ireland on Wikipedia in the info box and as a logo in place of a flag for Northern Ireland to identify it from the other home nations. --
Cka4004
14:46, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I like the map, and have a suggestion for the "island" problem - could you have two little black line showing tiny continuations of the coastline where it extends beyond NI's borders on both sides? Just to show this is not an island, but not obtrusive to show the whole of the island of Ireland (if that's the right expression). I only comment as I failed to recognise what it was at a first glance and thought it needed a little pointer that it wasn't an island, if you see what I mean. Just a suggestion. LeeG 22:08, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
OK, this may hurt sensitivities on all sides, but personally I don't see any way for the editors contributing to page to resolve the flag/no flag infobox issue alone (i.e. reach a consensus). Trenches have been dug and in fairness its too tight an issue for people close to the matter to call for themselves. I'm of the opinion that there is a case for both sides, but I would not like to be the one to have to call it, nor am I willing to do contribute to the debate for one side or another. What I suggest is that the contributers here put the matter to an international "jury" and put it to a full Request for Comment. Both (or three? UB/UF/no flag) sides should be able to put their cases forward in a fair manner then allow neutral contributors to judge what they would do. -- sony-youth talk 18:17, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I had, perhaps wrongly, thought that the
was possibly going to be an option, as it is suitable instead of the UB as an identification of Northern Ireland on Wikipedia such as when placed in an Infobox, or a User box etc like this,
-- Cka4004 21:45, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I agree absolutely with
Cka4004; on purely aesthetic grounds the NI map looks good:
. It does not show any other part of the UK or any other part of Ireland; it reflects the 'no flaf' majority - heck it's green and vaguely shamrockish. If the NI Unionist folk are happy with it I really can't see any objections. Surely what we want here is COMPROMISE, not victory? (
Sarah777
22:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC))
The Ark poll states:
A plurality of the present-day population (40%) define themselves as Unionist, 22% as Nationalist and 35% define themselves as neither.
The survey was not an accurate analysis of the current views on Northern Ireland demographics relating to Nationalists & Unionists. The poll had a majority of 51% taking the poll who were Protestant, with only 37% who were catholic. To get a true and unbiased view on NI demographics, a poll should represent a 50/50 cut. The Ark poll, which is cited in the article gives a poor reflection of the actual true opinions on Northern Ireland demographics and shouldn't be used on the NI wiki page.If the poll was less biased, the result would be much closer. Previous Ark polls show bias towards Protestant populations as there has never been a Catholic majoritive or equality in an Ark polling, according to Ark's very own tech notes. Ark's survey notes -- Jobjobjob talk 20: 53:17, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
And while that is true, the population of Northern Ireland does not consist of 37% catholic/51% protestant. The count is closer to 44/53. And in the interest of this debate, the current issue revolves around catholics and protestants. And while I don't mind including the other groups, my point I was trying to highlight was that the poll was heavily in favour of the Protestant voice, while lessening the Catholic voice. It was not to neglect other groups. I think if you are going to state on a wiki entry a percentage of who claim unionism and nationalism, the survey should be more honest and not biased. Also, more information on the survey should of been released, as public opinion can change slightly from city to city. From example, If I was to conduct a survey in Derry which has a catholic majoritive, the outcome would be drastically different.
If we are going to specify public opinion, the statistics should be more widespread. I think for something as complex as the North should involve 10,000 people, with 2,000 from each major city with the percentage of the demographics of that said city being reflective in the poll. The current Ark survey is dishonest and should be removed from the wiki entry.-- Jobjobjob talk 21:44:00, 16 April 2007 (GMT)
I have already highlighted the inaccuracies. I have quoted it for the benefit of you in my initial entry. It states that 40% consider themselves Unionist, while 22% as nationalist. The survey conducted had a lower than average catholic count. In a survey that states who is and isn't a unionist or nationalist, the survey shoould be more honest in the percentage of catholics & protestants used for the survey. For example, I could survey 20 catholics from a city and 10 protestants - Would that give me an honest demographical stance for that city? Absolutely not. Which is what Ark's survey is doing.. The percentage of protestants compared to catholics used in the survey is not a true represenation of the percentage of protestants to catholics in the North, and thus isinaccurate and a dishonest estimate of the real demographics. .-- Jobjobjob talk 21: 57:00, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I have not. How is it bogus to ask for a fair percentage in the survey? If the catholic represenation in the poll is less than the true catholic representation of the North, then the true number of those claiming a specific demographic (notably nationalism) will be less than it's true result. The survey favours the protestant opinion by lessening the catholic voice, using a less-than-average catholic surveyees. There are two possible surveys that can be taken. A 50/50 survey to get an honest assessment of both individual group's opinions for statisitical purposes and a true demographical survey, with correct percentages in the catholic and protestant people surveyed. Jobjobjob 21:19, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I take it when people say 'North' they mean Northern Ireland??, also just because somone is a catholic it doesn't mean they are a Nationalist, and just because they are a Protestant doesn't mean they are a Unionist, the poll by Ark, impartially and randomly selects people from across the country, it just happens that the last poll had more protestants than catholics, the next one may have more catholics than protestants, however a 50/50 poll would not reflect a true analysis of the NI people as not everyone is Catholic or Protestant. Unless people are hand picked, which would spoil the legitimacy of the poll, then there will probably never be a purely equal % to that of say census data to the demographics and opinions of the people in any poll. -- Cka4004 21:43, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
"it just happens that the last poll had more protestants than catholics" - It just so happens that EVERY poll has had the catholic community outnumbered by protestants, always exceeding their demographical percentage. The reference backs up my claims. Not all protestants are unionist and not all catholics are nationalist - This is correct, but if we're going to get an honest evaluation of who's who - At least do an accurate poll instead of a protestant heavy poll. I reaffirm my original point and ask for that citation to be removed from the article as it is not an accurate demographical poll and shouldn't be treated as such. Jobjobjob 21:16, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Rather than seeking outside help, could we not agree (however imperfect) that this map is not a flag; that it neutrally represents NI without any reference to either the rest of the UK or Ireland - and adopt it as the NI symbol till (if) the Assembly come up with something different? Really is time to put this argument to bed! ( Sarah777 22:36, 16 April 2007 (UTC))
I dont think that image should be used in the Infobox on this article, it is fine on other templates, but not on the main Northern Ireland article, as Northern Ireland is not a Island on its own but part of Ireland and the image should reflect that, the infobox looks better without it.-- padraig3uk 22:48, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm not opposed to using the map image on the infobox on this page. I'm bored of this argument. My feelings on people claiming consensus where there is none, and the reasons why either the UB and UF should be used are clear. But the "Northern Ireland has no current National Flag See: Northern Ireland flags issue" text should be removed from the infobox. If a newcomer looks at the article they'll wonder why it is there. As Beano says, using the map image on other infoboxes looks stupid. We need another alternative for those. Also, removing the Ulster Banner from Wikipedia entirely isn't an option - there are some places that its use is appropriate. Stu ’Bout ye! 08:24, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I agree with Trugster's wording - "Northern Ireland has no official flag (see Northern Ireland flags issue)". Stu ’Bout ye! 16:02, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Shouldn't that wording be "Northern Ireland has no official regional flag - see:
Northern Ireland flags issue" , now how about this image as an alternative.--
padraig3uk
16:18, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
I think everyone agreed to
, with yourself being the exception. --
Cka4004
19:41, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Padraig, it will cause aggro because it shows NI in Ireland but not in the UK. Also, the green map looks like an emblem rather than just a map - which is the point surely? (And it looks much better; appearance is also important in a symbol to represent a group of people). ( Sarah777 21:10, 24 April 2007 (UTC))
Opposed. The green shape of Northern Ireland is not a flag. It doesn't compare to the flags of Scotland, England and Wales and, frankly, looks ridiculous in the proper flag's stead. The flag of Northern Ireland should not have been removed from the Northern Ireland article in the first place. The current infobox is completely inaccurate - it suggests that Northern Ireland doesn't have a flag! It does (see right). -- Mal 09:16, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
I have asked some questions regarding changes to Northern Ireland on the " Template:Irish states since 1171" template. They are posted on the talk page there. -- sony-youth talk 20:42, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Clarifier: I would certainly be opposed to the splitting of the main Northern Ireland article. To do so would be misleading and uninformative. The only thing I would support would be the creation of a new article about the 1921-72 NI state. Under no circumstances should the current NI article the abridged to facilitate this. Stu brings up a good point about the name. I think History of Northern Ireland (1921-72) is too borad, as it covers all history, but maybe I'm being too strict abou it. The name I suggested, however, could imply a difference in states between then and now - that should be avoided. -- sony-youth pléigh 08:59, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
No opposition to History of Northern Ireland (xxxx-xx), only to Northern Ireland (state, xx-xx) as the latter would be misleading. Stu ’Bout ye! 10:07, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
What's this Southern Ireland article about with
Southern Ireland
?? This "state" co-existed in the same space and time as the Irish Republic/Free State, did it? How does that work?!!(
Sarah777
21:20, 24 April 2007 (UTC))
So it was a state of mind rather than a state! Can we write an article on the sovereign state of Ruritania? I believe Groucho Marx was it's President sometime in the 1930s - seems to have rather more reality than "Southern Ireland"? ( Sarah777 22:53, 24 April 2007 (UTC))
When did it exist? And how could it co-exist in space and time with another state? ( Sarah777 10:36, 25 April 2007 (UTC))
Sarah if you read the article it will explain when it existed, the fact is it did exist and is part of Ireland history, even if it wasn't recognised by the majority of people elected to it, I have also split this discussion off from the template debate above.-- padraig3uk 11:26, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Sarah, take it to the Southern Ireland talk page. This page is for Northern Ireland. -- sony-youth pléigh 11:31, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Nope folks, read the article. It clearly didn't exist - any more than Ruritania did. Therein lies the solution perhaps. As explained, it is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for two different states to co-exist in the same space and time. Therefore all counter-arguments fall. Self-evidently. ( Sarah777 11:40, 25 April 2007 (UTC))
I'm proposing a redesign of the "Irish states template", you can see my proposal at the talk page there. Please let me know what you think, good, bad, or indifferent - and also suggestion to improve it. -- sony-youth pléigh 08:40, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
The civil rights movement of the 1960s was an earthquake in the history of Northern Ireland. It represented the end of the Stormont regime, it led unintentionally to the Troubles and it was part of a worldwide movement (blacks in the US, the Paris spring, the czech uprising ...). Apparently not important enough to get into wikipedia history of Northern Ireland! That makes the entire article a joke. And as for the discussion page : thousands of words about the flag and yet not one comment about the dreadful history section!!!
Pmurnion 13:01, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
{{ editprotected}}
I'd like to to change the First Minister and Deputy First Minister in the infobox to Ian Paisley and Martin McGuinness, respectively. They just took their pledges of office.
I think that either the page protection be removed or someone here hurry's up and updated the Assembly section, as we now have a First Minister along with a full working Assembly!
It's still protected!!! Whats going on???
Not done The page is no longer protected so any required changes can be made.
Adambro
14:42, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
{{ editprotected}}
The main article should be flagged with
![]() | This article documents a
current event. Information may change rapidly as the event progresses, and initial news reports may be
unreliable. The
latest updates to this article
may not reflect the most current information. (May 2007) |
and ideally included on the Wikipedia main page as a current event. Northern Ireland today formed a new power-sharing government, marking the large end to sectarian conflict that has affected Northern Ireland, Eire and Great Britain for 30 years.
Not done The page is no longer protected so any required changes can be made.
Adambro
14:42, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
I hope that this page will be updated asap as the Northern Ireland Assembly is up and running with a First Minister and Deputy First Minister.
The Rev. and Rt. Hon. Ian Paisley was made First Minister of Northern Ireland today. The Deputy First Minister is Martin McGuinneas.
As the legislative assembly is now up and running, it may be considered as well that the emblem of the Legislative Assembly of Northern Ireland might be used in the fact box as the emblem for northern Ireland. It is the only officially recognised logo apart from the Union Flag and Royal Coat of Arms. Image:Northern Ireland Assembly logo.png
This proposal makes little sense...but then most of the proposals made in this site are of a similar nature! The LOGO is that of the NI Assembly not that of Northern Ireland. Why not have the logo of the PSNI or maybe the NI Gay Rights Association? But then I would suggest that whichever you should choose that you ask them for permission! We wouldn't want to break any copyright laws would we! Lughlamhfhada 21:40, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Lughlamhfhada 19:43, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Dear Sarah, I'm confused! according to Sony-youth you think that my comments are 'disingenuous'. I thought that you gave your support to the idea 'that the emblem of the Legislative Assembly of Northern Ireland might be used in the fact box as the emblem for northern Ireland.', a proposal which I found to make 'little sense'.I said that it would make equal sense hijacking the logo of the PSNI or the NIGRA. All these LOGOS are there to represent the various organizations, no more and no less! A flag is used usually to represent a country and thus we have Wales represented by the Welsh Flag (depicting a dragon). Sony-youth is evidently not used to 'Ulster plain speaking'! I have expressed my exasperation at the (low) standard of debate and the lack of basic knowledge/education of some of the participants....but this is not to take away from the right of these participants to join in debate and to receive a proper hearing, rather is it a 'plea' to the people involved not to 'mouth off' unless they can back up their argument with sensible reasons or examples. We all carry baggage from our past and hopefully we can learn from one another, be tolerant, understanding and forgiving. If we can try harder to understand the views of others, maybe our own views will become more rounded and less confrontational. Lughlamhfhada 10:54, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
If, please God, the devolved Assembly works out OK, surely the British Army can withdraw, and the post of Secretary of State for Northern Ireland can be abolished? I accept that we might need to give things a year or two to settle down, but surely these two objectives are valid? Millbanks 22:01, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Doing research on natural history of Northern Ireland the first place I looked was here, only to find that there is quite literaly nothing. To see some articles added would be of great help.
Thanks
Try Ireland as the flora and fauna don't tend to worry about the border. If your research finds anything new, please add it and cite your sources. -- Red King 19:47, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
I have problems with the following statement; "Often the use of the Irish language in Northern Ireland has met with considerable suspicion from Unionists, who have associated it with the largely Catholic Republic of Ireland, and more recently, with the republican movement in Northern Ireland itself. Catholic areas of Belfast have road signs in Irish as they are in the Republic, viewed by some as a way to let Protestants know that they are not welcome". There are no references given by the author which would serve to back up these observations. I have a completely different view and feel that the writer of these less than fair comments is perhaps biased towards or ignorant of (or maybe both) the Gaelic language. Lughlamhfhada 19:00, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Due to some comments on the United Ireland page, I thought it may be of interest to reproduce the discussion here. Hope it dos'nt offend anyone too much! Fergananim 19:23, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Ireland was united in 1014 a.d. by Brian Boru, high king of Ireland.FACT.
The Gaels (or the Scotti as they were termed in the Middle Ages) did not consider themselves 'Irish' or 'just Irish, rather did they consider themselves as belonging to an ethnic group 'the Gaels'( 'Scotti' in the Latin language) who had a common language and history.( Ireland, the Isle of Mann and most of modern day Scotland was considered to be their patrimony. Ríocht na nGael or 'Kingdom of the Gael'.) It is interesting that Brian Boru [sic] is not referred to in the 'Book of Armagh' as the 'Ard Ri' – that is, High-King – but rather he is declared "Emperatus Scottorum," or "Emperor of the Scots." It was the English speaking sons of former Palesmen ( Wolf Tone etc) who latched on to the 'United Ireland' bandwagon. This phenomenon was to be expected, given the earlier developments, notably in France regarding republicanism.
That modern nationalism should concentrate on the island of Ireland to the exclusion of the wider Gaeldom is a reflection of the decline of the Gaelic language and weak political influence exerted by Gaelic speaking people in our society. Eog1916 09:08, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Could someone who knows the subject take a look at Civil rights movement#Civil rights movement in Northern Ireland as it is a vandalised mess. Which in a way is good because what's left if you just delete the vandalisms is a bunch of non-sequiturs. -- 88.97.11.54 11:13, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Ok, while I recognize the various positions that lead to the consensus to remove all flags, the infobox suffers from the lack of one. So, my suggestion is, why not use a neutral unoffical flag? St. Patrick's Flag or the Ulster Flag, with specific notation that they are just regional flags... perhaps even a proposed flag with "Proposed Flag" under it? I'm aware that this debate is tired to most, but the top of page is very bland and completely lacking in any symbolism of Northern Ireland. -- MichiganCharms 04:57, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Any thoughts on changing the images in the article? The Mussenden Temple is an interesting photo, but should be replaced with the far more recognisable Image:Causeway-code poet-4.jpg. I also think the mural photo should be replaced. It we replace it with another mural photo then Image:Derry mural.jpg fits in with the accompanying text. But I would prefer a historical photograph, something like Image:Carson signing Solemn League and Covenant.jpg. There should also be a couple of photos of Derry and Belfast, like Image:Shipquay Street Derry SMC 2005.jpg and Image:H&W Cranes2.jpg or Image:Belfast City Hall - Carisenda.jpg or Image:Stormont Parliamentary Building 01.JPG. Stu ’Bout ye! 08:20, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
A request for comments has been filed concerning the conduct of Sarah777. The discussion can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Sarah777, where you may want to participate. -- sony-youth pléigh 14:08, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Since the flag and arms are back in I'd like to change to captions to "Former flag of ..." and give dates etc. but cannot do the same for the coat of arms. Could someone look at the code and see what can be done. -- sony-youth pléigh 10:17, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
The page has been protected again at a stage that appears to endorse the POV of the campaign to remove the Flag of Northern Ireland from Wikipedia.. just like all the other articles and templates regarding this exact issue! -- Mal 23:17, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
The Ulster Banner is not Northern Ireland's flag. That some people call it "the Northern Ireland flag" does not mean it is anymore than calling Northern Ireland "the occupied six counties" means that it is. There is legislation regarding the use of flags in Northern Ireland, and this legislation does not recognise the Ulster Banner. The English, Scottish and Welsh flags are all recognised to varying degrees by the British government; the Ulster Banner is not. Even the main Unionist parties eschew the Ulster Banner in favour of the Union Flag. [13] [14] I hardly need to point out that it does have negative connotations for many, both Catholic and Protestant. Given that its status is unofficial, this is an important consideration for us.
Now, it is used by various sporting bodies in lieu of a flag, and that's certainly one argument for using it in the info box. But that's not the only consideration, and it certainly is not the same at it *obviously* being *the* Northern Ireland flag. Let's stick to the verifiable facts. Martin 02:27, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
I'll start with my disclosure: I'm not from any of Northern Ireland, the Republic of Ireland, or any part of the United Kingdom. I have no agenda to push, nor any political alignment. My interest here comes from the desire to see an end to this disruptive edit warring.
I think that
is unquestionably a widely known flag representing Northern Ireland, and to omit it from the infobox in this main article is puzzling. For example, just this past weekend I was watching the
2007 U.S. Open Golf Championship on television, and at times in the third round, I saw
Graeme McDowell's name tagged with that flag. I hadn't even heard of him before (
Darren Clarke is the only golfer from Northern Ireland I knew), but I instantly recognized his nationality because of the flag. The
US Open website is also showing the flag icon. It has been mentioned before that
FIFA use that flag on
their web site and the
Commonwealth Games Federation does too on
their web site.
From my perspective, I think it is safe to say that this flag is clearly the de facto flag of Northern Ireland, even if it is not the de jure flag. I think the "no flag" camp on Wikipedia isn't really representing a NPOV position because of that. I think that using the argument that it hasn't been a legal flag since 1972 as justification for outright removal from the infobox has elements of WP:IDONTLIKEIT and WP:POINT. Neutral point of view is supposed to balance different views, and I don't see outright removal of the flag as considering the view of people like me who recognize that flag.
With that in mind, I would propose that the flag be put back in the infobox, but with a caption like:
The word-smithing can follow, but my point is that we can appeal to both views with something like this. This caption clearly states the legal status, and recognizes the widespread usage. I think the "Symbols" section of this article and the whole Northern Ireland flags issue article are both fairly well written, and help explain the situation.
I think it would be overly optimistic to think that my comments will impel both sides of this debate to work towards a compromise consensus solution, but I had to say something! The tug of war that this page has become is not helpful to the project. Andrwsc 05:02, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
I can see right away that the official flag of Northern Ireland is going to cause controversy. There are two options: 1) That this is an encyclopedia, and we stick with the correct information or 2) We appease a minority of people by changing the flag to the defunct Northern Ireland flag.. some of whom will still not accept that flag either.
The emblem of the Northern Ireland Assembly is just that - an emblem used by that body. The proposed flags have not yet been adopted and so are not official.
This leads me back to the two suggestions above - the official flag of Northern Ireland (the Union Jack), or the unofficial Northern Ireland Flag. I do not want to purposely cause offence (though it seems to me that anyone likely to be offended by the official flag would also refuse to accept the existance of Northern Ireland in the first place), but I do want to include factual information in this encyclopedia.
Hmm, outside as in what? Would you count me? -- John 14:18, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Some additional thoughts come to mind after seeing these comments:
With that in mind, I offer another suggestion. How about something like this?
![]() |
![]() | |
The
Union Flag is the only official flag of Northern Ireland |
The
Ulster Banner was officially used from 1953-72 and has some de facto usage now |
I would hope that this kind of solution addresses both main viewpoints in this issue. Remember, a good compromise probably means that not everybody likes it, but everybody can live with it. I believe a solution can be found, but I am an optimist. Andrwsc 20:19, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Agree. There is no compelling need for a flag. Why is that simple fact so difficult for some editors to accept? Why the determination to insert pov into the infobox? I don't see the point. It is time we all accepted that there will be no agreement here and thus "no flag" is the neutral position. ( Sarah777 20:51, 22 June 2007 (UTC))
I agree with Andrwsc's initial thoughts and, in fact, its been basically what I've been saying all along. I would be happy with that compromise and I seem to remember the article did sit with that very compromise for a while, until around the beginning of this year was it..? -- Mal 10:38, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Regretfully, this discussion is degenerating to the same old rhetoric, instead of moving forward to a lasting compromise consensus. It's difficult for me to understand statements such as "there is no NI flag" ( Sarah777) and "it is not the role of WP to invent a flag when none exists" ( padraig3uk). Clearly it "exists". I saw it on the U.S. Open telecast last week. You can see it in a photo of the Northern Ireland flag bearer in the 2002 Commonwealth Games on the BBC web site. So then, how can I understand statements that it is "used by extremists on one side of a divided community" ( padraig3uk) or that it is a "divisive sectarian symbol" ( Sarah777)? Unless the Commonwealth Games Council for Northern Ireland and the Irish Football Association only represent "extremist" athletes, these statements can only be viewed as hyperbole language used to push a certain position.
To restate some obvious facts and policy:
The only conclusion that can be drawn from these points, while maintaining Wikipedia policy, is to show both flags, with appropriate explanatory captions. Of the four options available (show one flag only, the other flag only, show both, or show neither), I truly believe that this is the alternative that best follows Wikipedia policy. Andrwsc 19:09, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
I totally agree with the original comments from andrew. Traditional unionist 17:46, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Just for anyone who is interested: Both the BBC and even the SDLP refer to the "Northern Ireland flag" and "red-and-white Northern Ireland flag" respectively [15]. beano 10:39, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
The former flag of the government of Northern Ireland should not be in the infobox. It is the FORMER flag of Northern Ireland, not the current flag of Northern Ireland. It would be like putting the swastika flag in the Germany page as it is the Former flag of Germany. The only flag that is for a fact the flag of Northern Ireland, the only flag backed up by legislation is the Union Jack. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.29.236.244 ( talk • contribs)
You miss the point. The Ulster Banner is clearly used today, so it is not just a former flag. Also, this issue cannot be dropped until consensus is reached, because the article is under protection until that time. You can't dismiss opinions you disagree with in an attempt to have the article unprotected. I am trying to reach a mutually agreeable position in an attempt to reach consensus — I suggest you also try to have an open mind and do the same thing, so that we can resolve the issue properly and move on to improving the article. Andrwsc 20:35, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
What does O6 mean? - some relative of oxygen?? - I hope it is not a bigoted, biased and blatently offensive term for Northern Ireland —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dionysus99 ( talk • contribs) 09:25, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
(deindent) So you believe that FIFA and UEFA dictate that the IFA uses this flag at matches and on their websites? Is there any evidence for this? -- John 17:57, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
The vast majority of images on this page are taken up by symbols of dispute - from the flags debate to the Free Derry mural.
Meanwhile the page doesn't even have a picture of Stormont. Now I don't imagine there are many provinces or regions on Wikipedia with pages that don't show their significant legislative body.
I would have assumed that the page would be better made up of things that are undisputed and actually make Northern Ireland seem like the fairly normal place it is becoming, rather than squabbling over flags and concentrating on the divide which is becoming increasingly unimportant. -- Breadandcheese 20:30, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Agree totally. An excellent reason for removing ALL divisive symbols. ( Sarah777 20:53, 22 June 2007 (UTC))
Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not censored, it is displaying the truth. In an article on a place that is so divided, the truth is there is division. - MichiganCharms 21:20, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Protection expires in a few hours and I have been asked to renew it. What do other people think? Is there likely to be another edit war over flags in infoboxes or some other issue, or should we let it go unprotected for a while? -- John 04:50, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
Could we try to ensure that the any Curreny such as the Gross domestic product is listed with the GBP (£) as neither Northern Ireland, United Kingdom or any of the British Isles use the US Dollar unless they are on Holiday to the USA. Craig7006 19:48, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
:Disagree. As the British Isles are claimed to include Ireland and Ireland does not use GBP; US$ are more appropriate (though I'd prefer € myself).
Ooops! Wrong talk...I thought this was the "British" Isles page - really must start reading stuff before responding. (
Sarah777
00:29, 30 June 2007 (UTC))
I did not get overly involved in the awful debacle of removing the Northern Ireland flag from the Northern Ireland article. Bow I want to challenge some things that have been taken as given. 1) The Union Flag has no sanction from anything, save for the Mandleson flags order. It's design or use is not laid down in legislation, only convention. It is not in the legalistic sense an official flag, the UK does not have one. 2) There is no citation on any article, despite tags requesting citations for the claim that the flag only began usage in 1953, nor any source for the claim that it fell into disuse in 1972 or 3. Now both these things may well be correct, but why is an entire (and illogical) argument being based on two unsourced claims? Traditional unionist 21:55, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
I'd object. The Irish flag has nothing to do with Northern Ireland. The two flags option with explanations seems the most reasonable. I'm also still waiting for sources..... Traditional unionist 07:13, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
I want to remind those who oppose the use of the flag that I am still waiting for references to the claims I cite. Traditional unionist 21:17, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Even that isn't very clear. It doesn't state the detail of why the Union flag is the only official flag, gives no background and only mentions the Mandleson flags order. I might try this myself. Traditional unionist 09:42, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Looking at that parliamentary answer again, it also says that there is nothing official about the welsh flag either! Which vindicates the view that UK flags are not based in any official use, as there are no specific written guidelines. Traditional unionist 11:01, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Unless that answer was written using the same lazy assumptions that have been applied here? I still have not seen any fully drawn out explanation for the view it fell into disuse in 1973. Traditional unionist 11:23, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
In all honesty, how is it possible to reach a consensus on an issue, with people with attitudes like this?! Its incredulous! British rule in Northern Ireland was entrenched by the Belfast Agreement! The Union flag is the internationally accepted flag of Crossmaglen and Londonderry! Australia used the Union flag as a symbol of its colonial history - this is not in any way relevant to the issue at hand! The tricolour does not represent Northern Ireland, and never has! Traditional unionist 13:05, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
That fact that the "International Community" chose to ignore did not make it "illegal", and with respect I thing the Constitution of a democratic sovereign state has rather more validity than any personal declaration you or I might make. So, the tricolour had "legality" just as the UB had. That is the only point I'm making here. ( Sarah777 03:25, 13 July 2007 (UTC))
-
MichiganCharms
03:28, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
This is probably far to naive to ever work, but I've made up a propsed change to the infobox in my sandbox. -- sony-youth pléigh 09:03, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
The idea of having offensive flags is an interesting one. Is it possible to include the minority chinese, vietnamese and traveller communities in this. If we can all offend everyone equally we may be able to make progress.-- ZincBelief 14:09, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Traditional Unionist, you should be confident, a compromise is always possible. A patchwork idea has merits. You have proposed that the UB is the de facto flag for Northern Ireland. I personally agree, but nationalists believe (rightly or wrongly) that this is a unionist flag for unionists, totally unrepresentative of them. Similarly the tricolour, to a unionist this represents an all-ireland, but this is what a nationalist would see as representing them. Hence I believe in keeping with ZincBelief and sony's proposal of patchwork. I would keep the UJ as the main flag (due to it being most symbolic of the UK and for that reason only), whilst having the UB and tricolour as other flags of equal size, each one symbolising nationalist and unionist people. Essentially this is sony's sandbox but with the UJ and UB switched and I also believe, as sony has done, that it is important to point out the NI has no official flag at the moment. ~~ BoroForLife 16:37, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Would you not agree that the use of the UB to represent Northern Ireland at the commonwealth games gives it de facto status? ~~ BoroForLife 17:18, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
How about This as a alternative version.-- padraig 17:40, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
I have altered the Wording on the Ulster Banner, see Here.-- padraig 09:31, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Thats my understanding, although the Ulster branch (as it does in rugby) uses white and red with the red hand [22]. The key point here is that there are exceptions to every rule but that the rule stands in the majority of cases. ~~ BoroForLife 21:29, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
and no-one's done anything silly yet, shall we decide where to go from here with regard to flags? Straw poll? Biofoundationsoflanguage 17:18, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Absolutely not. It implies that the republic has some jurisdiction over NI, that is not true. The proposal is misleading. Traditional unionist 21:44, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Well if Lighthouses are the path to a united Ireland I'll be amazed. Using an irrelevant flag in the infobox of a country is a bizarre suggestion. It would be like using the French Tricolour in the infobox for Canada because of Quebec. Traditional unionist 07:46, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
It may not be a perfect analogy, but it certainly is not disingenuous. What flags each side use is a matter for the flags issue page, not the NI infobox. Traditional unionist 08:17, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
We need a flag that can offend everyone equally. How about the red finger of Ulster, as used in the portadown news website?-- ZincBelief 10:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
actually I think that Biofoundationsoflanguage's suggestion is a good compromise. Traditional unionist 11:06, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Encyclopedia Britannica uses the NI flag to denote Northern Ireland - http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9110757/Northern-Ireland
-- 82.29.235.160 17:28, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
-- padraig 17:42, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
That's probably fair enough. With or without the Union Flag above it? Traditional unionist 09:57, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
You are wring to equate the tricolour with the Flag of Northern Ireland. We can dispute the current status of the latter, but what is certainly true is that the tricolour has never had any relevance to Northern Ireland. Your point is not valid. Traditional unionist 10:04, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Lads, you're not going to solve this one here. You know that. Don't try shouting each other down over it. -- sony-youth pléigh 10:45, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Google "Flag of Northern Ireland" what do you get? That together with the sporting uses makes it de facto, common use, flag of NI. Yet again you want to remove all UK flags from wikipedia, NO flags in the UK have "civic" status. Traditional unionist 13:40, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
The tired and insulting approach of reducing the people of northern ireland to two groups will not help resolve this debate, nor is it appropriate in my opinion. It is in essence a breach of WP:Civil. The overwhelming statistical evidence (as you can see from google) is that the Ulster Banner has de facto status. Britannica encyclopedia uses it. Non political entities use it, northern ireland can perhaps be viewed as something more than just a political entity. However the statistical weight is enough to add this into the infobox with appropriate notes. "De facto flag, often regarded as offensive to the Nationalist community" This wikipedia article is not about sticking two fingers up at political ideology. It should not be about and not be controlled by political ideology. This is a neutral and academic article. It's purpose is to explain, not to offend. Those who continue to seek to exercise their bitter political viewpoints have nothing to add to this article and should desist from editing it. Adding in the Ulster Banner will only insult those who want to be insulted. Anyone who choses to read the entire article will clearly find the true story behind flags. If we want an infobox in keeping with the rest of the UK 'home nations' then it is clear which path we should take. If we want to be tied to pety political viewpoints lets just drop the entire infobox. Which will it be?-- ZincBelief 14:40, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
It strikes me that everyone save for Padraig is agreed on a proposal. It seems that we are agreed that it is the de facto flag of NI, even if neither Padraig nor I particularly like that fact. I think we can move this forward now. Traditional unionist 15:47, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Anyone else feeling a sense of deja vu? Biofoundationsoflanguage 17:01, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Padraig, I think part of your opposition to the UB is the continous insistance of traditional unionist that it should be used, which you would equate to his unionist beliefs and therefore a 'insult' (for want of a much better word) to your nationalist beliefs. Leaving this aside you must surely see that the UB is a widely reconised symbol of Northern Ireland. The UB is devisive (like NI), used by unionists (like many people from NI are) and is flown by many people as their flag of NI. Thus if you look at it this way it makes perfect sense to use it. Traditional Unionist has offered a compromise of including the 'UJ is the only official..etc' writing above it. To me this seems a fair compromise to end a length, prolonged debate which to an outsider would make Norn Irish people seem petty and arguementative. There are also a number of valid points for excluding the tricolour, mostly that it is representative of a united Ireland (whole island) and not spefically NI, which is what this article is about. ~~ BoroForLife 19:29, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
“ | The Union Flag is the official flag used by the government to represent Northern Ireland. The former official flag, the Ulster Banner, continues to be used by groups (such as sports teams) representing the territory in an unofficial manner (see Northern Ireland flags issue). | ” |
Zinc, I *am* an outsider. What political ideology are you accusing me of pushing? I'm still at a loss as to why outsiders decide what the flag of NI is. That is a sincere question, btw, not some snarky retorical question. If outsiders think the UB flag is *the* flag of NI, it is pressumably because that is what these outsiders believe the insiders hold as their flag, no? Nuclare 12:02, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
-- ZincBelief 12:24, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
I think we've reached agreement on this. Add it? Biofoundationsoflanguage 13:17, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
I have made up another proposal for editors to consider here see what you think.-- padraig 00:34, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
The compromise that I thought we had arrived at was the UJ, with the NI Flag below it, perhaps smaller, with a short explination of the issues. It would be better to put de facto under the NI Flag too. Traditional unionist 11:41, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
This discussion alone is already 51 KB long - is it getting anywhere other than confusion? Timrollpickering 12:08, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
This has been explained. The tricolour is not a flag unique to Northern Ireland unlike the Ulster Banner. They aren't comparible. Biofoundationsoflanguage 13:51, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
It may be true that the Ulster Banner may not represent Northern Ireland but at one time it did represent Northern Ireland and is used by the football and was flown at the Mexico world cup to represent Northern Ireland, so it should be in the article. Quick Reference 15:38, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Padraig, who made the flags of the Irish provinces official? Hundreds of flags around the world are de facto through common usage, this is not a special case. I'm away for the weekend, so this debate will run without me until Monday, but I for one agree with the compromise by Andrew, and disagree with padraig that it is in any POV and is certainly not OR. Traditional unionist 16:47, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Here's my UB suggestion (if there is an insistence on the UB's inclusion): Use the UF and Assembly symbol on top as "Official Flags and Symbols" (per Padraig). But below that (and the flag can even be smaller than the officials, if possible), put the UB, but make it's header "Flag for International Sports" (or some such that specifies it is *not* THE unoffical flag of NI. The text above the UB image could be something like: "Some sports organizations in NI currently use the UB for international competition, but this flag has no official status and is seen by some as a symbol of Unionist politics rather than a symbol of NI as a whole." I feel rejection on its way, but there you go for my humble opinion... :-) Nuclare 12:54, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
We have consensus to have the UB either alongside the Assembly symbol or the Union Flag- so we should go with that for now and move forward. Thanks Astrotrain 15:01, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
May I suggest a straw poll on all options so far? Biofoundationsoflanguage 16:12, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Please vote for your preferred option:
Option A - user:Andrwsc's proposal of The Union Flag and the Ulster Banner with the following wording
“ | The Union Flag is the official flag used by the government to represent Northern Ireland. The former official flag, the Ulster Banner, continues to be used by groups (such as sports teams) representing the territory in an unofficial manner (see Northern Ireland flags issue). | ” |
Option B - User:Sony-youth's proposal [ here]
“ | The Ulster Banner and with The Northern Ireland Assembly Symbol beside it. with note below The Union Flag is the only official flag that represents Northern Ireland. The former official flag, the Ulster Banner, continues to be used by groups (such as sports teams) representing the territory in an unofficial manner (see Northern Ireland flags issue). | ” |
Option C - user:padraig's First proposal [ here]
“ | The Union Flag on top with the Ulster Banner and Tricolour both below with notes. | ” |
Option D - user:padraig's Second proposal [ here]
“ | The Union Flag with The Northern Ireland Assembly Symbol beside it. | ” |
I would like to add this option.
Option E - user:padraig's Third proposal [ here]
“ | The Union Flag and Assembly Symbol on top with the Ulster Banner and Tricolour both below with notes. | ” |
I hope everyone agrees that these are fairly represent the 5 serious options as above. Please vote, sign your preference.
Before voting, I'm trying to verify one point. As suggested in both Sony-youth's and Andrwsc's wording: what groups other than sports are using the UB to "represent the territory"? Nuclare 19:21, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Another idea This should please all sides Here.-- padraig 16:11, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
The current position of the page shows no flag. Is there a reason why a "status quo" option has not been put forward. Quick Reference 12:48, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
I note with interest that one additional option, that being Option E, was added after a number of pollers had made their mark, so why not add another.
Wouldn't you feel that this exercise is fundamentally flawed if the options which are put forward in a the poll are not explicitly discussed prior to the poll being initiated. Perhaps there should have been a "talks about talks" type of discussion about what options were to be put forward and what system of voting was to be adopted prior to the poll starting.
I deal with market research in my line of work and the outcome of questionnaires or straw polls such as this is to a large degree influence by the manner, sequence and phraseology used. Quick Reference 13:42, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
I agree with Traditional unionist on each the points he raises I suggest that before this poll goes further it should be halted so that an explicit discussion outlining the various options being put forward can be agreed on, the timeframe of the poll agreed and the method of calculating the votes agree. If this is undertaken correctly then the outcome of the poll has a greater chance of being accepted.
Bio, is also right that straw polls are tests for consensus, but I would reiterate that there is an increase level of probability if a poll is not only fair but is seen to be fair. Quick Reference 14:27, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
For everyone's convenience, here are the results so far.
1st preferences | 2nd preferences | 3rd preferences | all prefs |
---|---|---|---|
A x 3 | A x 2 | A x 0 | A x 5 |
B x 7 | B x 3 | B x 0 | B x 10 |
C x 1 | C x 2 | C x 1 | C x 4 |
D x 2 | D x 1 | D x 1 | D x 4 |
E x 1 | E x 0 | E x 0 | E x 1 |
14 |
Biofoundationsoflanguage 14:37, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Its a strawpoll, that all there is no concensus in nor was one sought, we are discussing differents ideas that all.-- padraig 17:35, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
With at least four possible images that we've been discussing that could go into the infobox, there are 16 possible combinations that could be chosen. There is very little chance at any sort of consensus with that number of options. Instead, I propose that we answer four simpler questions, and look for any strong consensus there:
I'm thinking that if we can get > 2/3 majority for each of these questions, once you add in the "don't care" to either the yes or no side, that would tell us something about consensus (or lack thereof). Comments? Andrwsc 23:21, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
I'll start with my responses:
To vote choose either Yes / No / Don't care in each of the four options
Hey! Anyone watching; 5 "yes" votes by Red Links! ( Sarah777 19:57, 9 August 2007 (UTC))
What do you mean you've already "clocked" them - I voted the same as everybody else? Why is my link coming up in red? -- Pondersomething 01:34, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Two dud "yes" votes here! ( Sarah777 19:59, 9 August 2007 (UTC))
I'm not a "dud" vote! My vote counts the same as yours! Why do you call mine a dud vote?? -- Pondersomething 01:36, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
My vote above is quite different to "my proposal", that's because what I had wanted was a "package" deal. A kind of al la carte staw poll doesn't really capture the issue, and in that case the only image that I can say is a legitimate emblem of Northern Ireland is the assembly logo. -- sony-youth pléigh 08:53, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Passing through Loyalist areas decorated for the twelth, I've seen very few plain Ulster banners. The version defaced with the Union Flag is far more common. So, if we want a de facto flag for the Loyalist community, that's the one to use. -- Cavrdg 05:32, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
There is no official flag for Northern Ireland so why have we not got an option to leave it blank instead of putting in a flag that will be disputed no matter which one is picked be it the Ulster banner or the Tri Colour. BigDunc 14:38, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
There are a lot of new editors jumping in to vote in the Ulster Banner Straw Poll you would not want to be paranoid about things would you. BigDunc 18:32, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Can't we use the Tricolour just to see what the Newsletter say about it? That article is a hoot! "There is no dispute about which flag represents Northern Ireland" ~ Danny Kennedy, UUP. That's wishful thinking if ever I've seen it! Martin 18:27, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
In Case anyone is confused as to the Status of Flags in the UK read this:
The English, Scottish and Welsh Flags are National Flags, but none for Northern Ireland except the Union Flag.-- Padraig 13:59, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Yes that is why the Union flag should be on the main page. Quite bizzare that is isn't - and makes Wikipedia look like a joke. Dionysus99 11:28, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
The box has exploded in size and is spraying bold, large and centre commands onto the main text - is anyone able to fix this? Timrollpickering 12:14, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
The template it self was edited at the time it went weird ( hist). I wonder what effect the changes will have on our options for the flag issue? -- sony-youth pléigh 14:01, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
IT'S BAAAAACK! Run for your lives -- Infobox-zilla has returned! Nuclare 11:04, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Let's all start a massive campaign begging the MLA's to come up with a damn flag already. Imagine the press we'd get :p - MichiganCharms 19:27, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Please see
Talk:Ulster-Scots#Flag for whether or not
is the right flag to illustrate articles such as that,
Scots-Irish American and the like.
Timrollpickering
19:55, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
This a proposal for a UK manual of style. This will of course cover the entirity of Ireland during the period 1801-1922 and Northern Ireland since 1922. I don't know how this will effect the current WP:IMOS but input would be welcome: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (United Kingdom-related articles). -- sony-youth pléigh 14:33, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
151 square miles? Wasn't it always 147? When and how did it increase in area.
Global warming is nothing more than leftist propaganda and the same pseudoscience as Evilution! Come to thing of it, wasn't Ulster always 4,552 square miles? Was the old figure simply an error? It's now listed as 4,559! I find it quite exciting that the British Empire is finally growing again after decades of continuious decline even if that recovery is mearly the result of natural processes rather than reconquest. :) (Ulster of course not being a colony but a part of the United Kingdom. The UK is not just the imperial power governing the British Empire it is part of the Empire itself, in fact it is the only large populous territory remaining in it!)
Just wondering, should Gerry Adams not be deputy first minister as he is the leader of Sinn Fein,same way as the lead of the D.U.P. is first minister? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.19.80.19 ( talk) 14:32, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 10 |