This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Northern Ireland Protocol article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
If someone would like to write some text around it, there is a good citation available from the BBC: Brexit: Irish Sea border issues foreseen when deal was done. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 00:14, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
With regret, I have again had to revert the changes made by User:161.23.160.115. Wikipedia is not a forum or a political platform. We report what reliable sources say, aiming for a neutral point of view. Also, Wikipedia is not a newspaper, so we deliberately lag behind the news and wait for considered view to emerge. For example, you describe the Theresa May Trilemma as an EU view: in fact that terminology was created by the UK media and widely reported, repeated and cited.
Please use this talk page to explain your concerns about the article as it stands. Proposed changes will need to be evidenced by a neutral third party source of sufficient stature. Your own opinion (or mine, equally) is entirely irrelevant. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 18:01, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
The reference in question, a 2017 BBC news article, which stated that unionists had welcomed some changes to a draft proposal, is not an appropriate reference for the text that it is supposed to be applying to. The text in question is about the NI protocol which didn't come about until 2019/20. There was never a time when unionists welcomed the protocol. The 2017 reference refers to something else entirely and therefore it is a deceptive reference. I will therefore remove it again. 2A00:23C2:4B02:C01:DC79:4765:BA91:35EF ( talk) 08:27, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
No problem. Thanks alot. 2A00:23C2:4B02:C01:E97D:3397:C714:9DB3 ( talk) 12:03, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
None of the other major papers are calling deadlock yet except the Independent. So I don't think we should do so either until talks are declared over. Even then, A16 has a month for further negotiations and chance to step back from the edge. In any case, it would be "Attempts to renegotiate end in deadlock" or similar, not "Deadlock and attempts to renegotiate" which doesn't make sense (cart before horse). -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 01:23, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
Arcahaeoindris boldly added the Boris Johnson sidebar which is a directory of articles about BJ. I reverted because this article is not about him. For readers on mobile (the majority) it adds s screed of waffle for minimal benefit. So a discussion is needed to see if there is a consensus for it to be included. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 16:19, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
The UK Government published the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill today:
– Kaihsu ( talk) 19:25, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
There's now an article for the Bill. Kaihsu ( talk) 09:22, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
There does not seem to be any mention as to exactly when the NIP was signed (and dated) or specifically who the signatories were. Such basic information would be helpful for better understanding.
Brian James 2A02:C7D:59E5:1E00:10B5:967D:7F57:AFD7 ( talk) 09:13, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
on 17 October, Johnson and Jean-Claude Juncker announced that they had reached agreement (subject to ratification) on a new Withdrawal Agreement which replaced the backstop with a new protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland. [1]Is that not enough?
I appreciate the efforts being made in this matter, but this whole area is in the process of going 'critical' at the moment. The 'media' is 'rather variable' in the area I mention - sometimes implying the NIP was signed by Liz Truss, but on other occasions perhaps it was Boris Hohnson and indeed, you use 'agreed'. I have no doubt the NIP was 'agreed', but it would be helpful if the 'media' could readily see the specific signatories (as well as their corresponmding titles at the time) and the date upon which they signed the NIP in anticipation of it applying as from the Withdrawal Agreement coming into force. 2A02:C7D:59E5:1E00:4DFA:F9C3:24BD:666E ( talk) 09:28, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
References
With the EU's lawsuit today, things could get nasty.
I suggest propecting this article.
2601:8A:C180:70:58FF:D843:8989:98CB ( talk) 16:46, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
PROTECTION REQUESTED: --- See /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection/Increase 2601:8A:C180:70:58FF:D843:8989:98CB ( talk) 16:54, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
[First three posts originally written at user talk:John Maynard Friedman and moved here at my request because other editors may wish to contribute to the discussion on how best to integrate band develop this thread.]
Last night you [JMF] updated my changes to Assembly election section of the Northern Ireland Protocol article, for the better in my opinion. However there is only one line dedicated to the DUP's refusal to nominate a DFM, and not mention of Paul Given's resignation 2 months before the election or the refusal to vote for a speaker after the election. In my opinion there should be an entire section detailing the Stormont shutdown. Do you agree? ApatheticName (talk) 13:14, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
@ApatheticName: This discussion should really take place at talk: Northern Ireland Protocol. Would you cut'n'paste it over there please, as other editors may want to contribute. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 20:02, 12 July 2022 (UTC) ApatheticName ( talk) 20:41, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
I have been bold and moved the sections on Legal challenge, 2022 NIA elections and the Bill up into ==Reactions==. Further improvement welcome. @ ApatheticName:, would you like to add a sentence or two on Given's resignation to the ===Unionist reaction=== subsection? -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 20:00, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
There is a link in the lede to Republic of Ireland–United Kingdom border - it had been piped to Republic of Ireland–United Kingdom border|UK-Ireland border. I removed the piping - any disputes about the article should resolved at the article's page, not at each link. An editor, John Maynard Friedman reverted, writing in the edit summary "rv good faith but see WP:IRE-IRL" There are two changes - the editor has replaced "Republic of Ireland" with "Ireland" and has reordered the naming, from placing Ireland first to placing UK first. The first change ("Ireland" instead of "Republic of Ireland") would seem to run afoul of the MOS that the editor linked to, specifically: "* Use "Ireland" for the state except where the island of Ireland or Northern Ireland is being discussed in the same context. In such circumstances use "Republic of Ireland" (e.g. " Strabane is at the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland")." And there is no justification given for reordering the names of the countries from how they appear in the main article. Jd2718 ( talk) 15:46, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
The border has had a special status since the thirty-year internecine conflict in Northern Ireland was ended by the Good Friday Agreement of 1998, since the border in question has already been defined in the first sentence of the article. No, I guess not, since in 1998 it was an internal EU border.
I see that the EU and UK have decided to have a change of name is needed to mark a new beginning:
(5) The Union and the United Kingdom have made a Joint Declaration in the Joint Committee to the effect that, wherever relevant in their dealings under the Withdrawal Agreement, they will, consistent with the requirements of legal certainty, refer to the Protocol as amended as to the “Windsor Framework”, and that they may in the same way refer to the Protocol as amended in their domestic legislation. [1]
I can understand the politics of that move, but the historical narrative needs to be preserved. So if anyone is thinking of doing a simple move, this is to put down a marker to say it would be controversial and would require debate. It may be easier to start a new article? 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 17:40, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
References
See Talk:Northern Ireland Protocol Bill 2022–23#Requested move 6 March 2023. Please contribute your views there. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 21:00, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Northern Ireland Protocol article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
If someone would like to write some text around it, there is a good citation available from the BBC: Brexit: Irish Sea border issues foreseen when deal was done. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 00:14, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
With regret, I have again had to revert the changes made by User:161.23.160.115. Wikipedia is not a forum or a political platform. We report what reliable sources say, aiming for a neutral point of view. Also, Wikipedia is not a newspaper, so we deliberately lag behind the news and wait for considered view to emerge. For example, you describe the Theresa May Trilemma as an EU view: in fact that terminology was created by the UK media and widely reported, repeated and cited.
Please use this talk page to explain your concerns about the article as it stands. Proposed changes will need to be evidenced by a neutral third party source of sufficient stature. Your own opinion (or mine, equally) is entirely irrelevant. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 18:01, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
The reference in question, a 2017 BBC news article, which stated that unionists had welcomed some changes to a draft proposal, is not an appropriate reference for the text that it is supposed to be applying to. The text in question is about the NI protocol which didn't come about until 2019/20. There was never a time when unionists welcomed the protocol. The 2017 reference refers to something else entirely and therefore it is a deceptive reference. I will therefore remove it again. 2A00:23C2:4B02:C01:DC79:4765:BA91:35EF ( talk) 08:27, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
No problem. Thanks alot. 2A00:23C2:4B02:C01:E97D:3397:C714:9DB3 ( talk) 12:03, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
None of the other major papers are calling deadlock yet except the Independent. So I don't think we should do so either until talks are declared over. Even then, A16 has a month for further negotiations and chance to step back from the edge. In any case, it would be "Attempts to renegotiate end in deadlock" or similar, not "Deadlock and attempts to renegotiate" which doesn't make sense (cart before horse). -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 01:23, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
Arcahaeoindris boldly added the Boris Johnson sidebar which is a directory of articles about BJ. I reverted because this article is not about him. For readers on mobile (the majority) it adds s screed of waffle for minimal benefit. So a discussion is needed to see if there is a consensus for it to be included. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 16:19, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
The UK Government published the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill today:
– Kaihsu ( talk) 19:25, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
There's now an article for the Bill. Kaihsu ( talk) 09:22, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
There does not seem to be any mention as to exactly when the NIP was signed (and dated) or specifically who the signatories were. Such basic information would be helpful for better understanding.
Brian James 2A02:C7D:59E5:1E00:10B5:967D:7F57:AFD7 ( talk) 09:13, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
on 17 October, Johnson and Jean-Claude Juncker announced that they had reached agreement (subject to ratification) on a new Withdrawal Agreement which replaced the backstop with a new protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland. [1]Is that not enough?
I appreciate the efforts being made in this matter, but this whole area is in the process of going 'critical' at the moment. The 'media' is 'rather variable' in the area I mention - sometimes implying the NIP was signed by Liz Truss, but on other occasions perhaps it was Boris Hohnson and indeed, you use 'agreed'. I have no doubt the NIP was 'agreed', but it would be helpful if the 'media' could readily see the specific signatories (as well as their corresponmding titles at the time) and the date upon which they signed the NIP in anticipation of it applying as from the Withdrawal Agreement coming into force. 2A02:C7D:59E5:1E00:4DFA:F9C3:24BD:666E ( talk) 09:28, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
References
With the EU's lawsuit today, things could get nasty.
I suggest propecting this article.
2601:8A:C180:70:58FF:D843:8989:98CB ( talk) 16:46, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
PROTECTION REQUESTED: --- See /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection/Increase 2601:8A:C180:70:58FF:D843:8989:98CB ( talk) 16:54, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
[First three posts originally written at user talk:John Maynard Friedman and moved here at my request because other editors may wish to contribute to the discussion on how best to integrate band develop this thread.]
Last night you [JMF] updated my changes to Assembly election section of the Northern Ireland Protocol article, for the better in my opinion. However there is only one line dedicated to the DUP's refusal to nominate a DFM, and not mention of Paul Given's resignation 2 months before the election or the refusal to vote for a speaker after the election. In my opinion there should be an entire section detailing the Stormont shutdown. Do you agree? ApatheticName (talk) 13:14, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
@ApatheticName: This discussion should really take place at talk: Northern Ireland Protocol. Would you cut'n'paste it over there please, as other editors may want to contribute. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 20:02, 12 July 2022 (UTC) ApatheticName ( talk) 20:41, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
I have been bold and moved the sections on Legal challenge, 2022 NIA elections and the Bill up into ==Reactions==. Further improvement welcome. @ ApatheticName:, would you like to add a sentence or two on Given's resignation to the ===Unionist reaction=== subsection? -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 20:00, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
There is a link in the lede to Republic of Ireland–United Kingdom border - it had been piped to Republic of Ireland–United Kingdom border|UK-Ireland border. I removed the piping - any disputes about the article should resolved at the article's page, not at each link. An editor, John Maynard Friedman reverted, writing in the edit summary "rv good faith but see WP:IRE-IRL" There are two changes - the editor has replaced "Republic of Ireland" with "Ireland" and has reordered the naming, from placing Ireland first to placing UK first. The first change ("Ireland" instead of "Republic of Ireland") would seem to run afoul of the MOS that the editor linked to, specifically: "* Use "Ireland" for the state except where the island of Ireland or Northern Ireland is being discussed in the same context. In such circumstances use "Republic of Ireland" (e.g. " Strabane is at the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland")." And there is no justification given for reordering the names of the countries from how they appear in the main article. Jd2718 ( talk) 15:46, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
The border has had a special status since the thirty-year internecine conflict in Northern Ireland was ended by the Good Friday Agreement of 1998, since the border in question has already been defined in the first sentence of the article. No, I guess not, since in 1998 it was an internal EU border.
I see that the EU and UK have decided to have a change of name is needed to mark a new beginning:
(5) The Union and the United Kingdom have made a Joint Declaration in the Joint Committee to the effect that, wherever relevant in their dealings under the Withdrawal Agreement, they will, consistent with the requirements of legal certainty, refer to the Protocol as amended as to the “Windsor Framework”, and that they may in the same way refer to the Protocol as amended in their domestic legislation. [1]
I can understand the politics of that move, but the historical narrative needs to be preserved. So if anyone is thinking of doing a simple move, this is to put down a marker to say it would be controversial and would require debate. It may be easier to start a new article? 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 17:40, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
References
See Talk:Northern Ireland Protocol Bill 2022–23#Requested move 6 March 2023. Please contribute your views there. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 21:00, 6 March 2023 (UTC)