![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 17 May 2011. The result of the discussion was speedy keep. |
![]() | A news item involving State visit by Elizabeth II to the Republic of Ireland was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 17 May 2011. | ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Troubles, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
[4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25] Strange Passerby ( talk • cont) 09:25, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
As it's a four day visit, it would seem logical to have a section for each day of the visit. Another possibility is a section on international reaction to the visit, should there be any. Mjroots ( talk) 11:04, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Perhaps the title of the article should be changed to "Queen Elizabeth II's visit to the Republic of Ireland as seen by the Guardian"? -- 89.216.218.134 ( talk) 16:21, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
To me the repeated references to "Elizabeth II" read very, very oddly indeed. OK I am not the most fanatical obsessive about royal matters (I fear I read the wrong newspaper, in fact ^^) but surely it's normal, without subscribing to any particular school of thought or PoV, to just call her "the Queen" since I think we've established which particular queen the article is about? "Liz" would seem a bit informal and "the Queen" does seem to be a pretty common usage. Well, not common common, that would be vulgar of me, but you know what I mean. Best wishes DBaK ( talk) 16:36, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Referring to her as "Elizabeth" is as crass as referring to President McAleese as "Mary" or President Obama as "Barack", but then this entire page reads as if it has been edited by Gerry Adams.-- Wessexboy ( talk) 19:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Really? Henry VIII uses the term "Henry" throughout the article. Louis XIV does too. And it's not exactly the same thing as using the "Barack" for the President, as it's acceptable to use "Obama" for him, and Elizabeth doesn't have a surname per se (we don't use the honorific "Mr. Obama" or "President Obama" on the site). Hot Stop (c) 04:17, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
It may have escaped people's notice that while "the Queen" is correct while she is in Britain (and I assume Commonwealth states), but it is not correct while she is in Ireland. She is not the Irish monarch. O Fenian ( talk) 07:15, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
Another reason to object to the usage "Queen Elizabeth II" is that, while she is Queen Elizabeth II of England and Wales, she is Queen Elizabeth of Scotland. Maproom ( talk) 10:45, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
FYI, the article Elizabeth II uses just "Elizabeth" at times. Hot Stop (c) 14:41, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Reading this article and remembering what I have seen deleted, edited and derided in other articles, I am surprised that the lack of balance has managed to escape the usually vigilant eyes of all those scissor happy editors. Can it be that the criticism that this is a Guardian article or edited by Gerry Adams isn't far off the mark? This is supposed to be a factual encyclopedia not an exemplar of current political correctness. User:jkslouth 00:19, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
At the time of writing, the Responses section contains descriptions of objections to the visit and difficulties caused in Dublin by security restrictions. This documentation of the negative consequences of the visit needs to be balanced by an account of the welcome the Queen has received and of the assertions by various public figures, media, and members of the public of the positive significance of the visit. In addition, vox-pop interviews on RTÉ television revealed individuals who had neutral reactions or who didn't care about the visit one way or the other. Reactions in Ireland are more diverse than the present Responses section describes, and it merits expansion. — O'Dea ( talk) 09:50, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
There seem to be a lot of people pushing an Irish republican agenda here to the point where the page appears to have been hijacked, with all edits that attempt to restore non-POV removed almost instantly. -- Wessexboy ( talk) 12:25, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
OK, the whole responses section needs a massive cleanup. Its clearly very one-sided, the rest of the article looks fairly anti-Queen too. I've seen a lot of positive coverage about the visit - the BBC has been very positive - so there are plenty of places to address the issues. I'm sure its expensive etc. and that should be mentioned too, but that shouldn't be the only thing that's mentioned. -- Eraserhead1 < talk> 07:28, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
This whole article has been transformed - well done guys. It was a total cake-and-arse party yesterday so congratulations to whoever sorted it out.-- 2.96.93.8 ( talk) 18:12, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
The Queen's arrival in the Republic of Ireland coincided with the 37th anniversary of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings. On 17 May 1974, 33 civilians were killed and almost 300 wounded when four car bombs exploded (three in Dublin, one in Monaghan) without warning. A loyalist paramilitary group, the Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF), claimed responsibility for the bombings in 1993. There are allegations, however, that members of the British security forces colluded with the loyalists.[52]
An inquiry into the attacks was published in 2003. However, the inquiry was hindered somewhat by the British government's refusal to release its official documents about the bombings.[53] An Oireachtas Committee found that the alleged involvement of British security forces could not be ruled out unless the files were released.[53] Victims' group Justice for the Forgotten called the visit a "golden opportunity" for the British government to release the files. Its spokeswoman, Margaret Urwin, said: "As prime minister David Cameron will accompany [the Queen] and is due to meet our Taoiseach Enda Kenny tomorrow, we believe this occasion affords Mr Cameron...a golden opportunity to make a genuine significant gesture of reconciliation".[54] The group appealed to the Queen and Cameron in an open letter that was issued on 16 May.[55] In the Dáil, Sinn Féin put forward a motion urging the Taoiseach to discuss the matter with PM Cameron when he arrives to accompany the Queen.[53]
What is everyone's opinion about this page's place in relation to Wikipedia:ARBCOM/TROUBLES#Final_remedies_for_AE_case? Would this article "reasonably" (second point of the AE ruling) be construed as being related to "The Troubles, Irish nationalism, and British nationalism in relation to Ireland"? Strange Passerby ( talk • cont) 03:06, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
I take a dim view of edits like this which attempt to draw a link between the irrelevant SNP electoral victory, its promise for Scottish independence, and this visit. They are totally unrelated. Strange Passerby ( talk • cont) 05:33, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
Why was this REMOVED when sourced [26]?And the refs? [27]( Lihaas ( talk) 08:21, 18 May 2011 (UTC)).
Will this be put back up for AFD when it is removed from the main page? I personally don't think this should be its own article, but rather incorporated into an article about state visits by the queen or from monarchs of the UK if such an article exists. Ryan Vesey ( talk) 03:21, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
I pulled this from the from page because of the NPOV tag, any chance of resolving the issues soon? RxS ( talk) 03:51, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
"Two water cannon have been imported to deal with any disorder that may arise."
This information is not about "itinerary". It is about security arrangements. Wanderer57 ( talk) 12:42, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
This is potentially misleading, this was not specifically planned. It is protocol for every visiting head of state to visit the Garden of Remembrance and lay a wreath, see here for example. O Fenian ( talk) 20:53, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
[28]. The Irish Free state ceased to exist in 1937, so a sentence reading "while the Irish Free State had by 1949" is totally wrong. Like I said when I reverted it, but it got changed to something wrong yet again. O Fenian ( talk) 23:49, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Just thought I'd mention that the main bit of coverage on the BBC day 2 seemed to be about the Queen's speech. That she'd started in Gaelic "A Uachtarain agus a chairde (President and friends)" [1](which drew the Irish prime minister to say 'wow' under her breath) [2] - and that seemed a pretty significant 'concession' from the Queen (as it was suggested she could 'not' apologise).
The other relevant tagline that kept being repeated was that 'with historical hindsight we can all see things which we would wish had been done differently or not at all' [3]
I'd think that the Queen's speech could make a subsection of this article - but I am not so 'bold' as to jump in there without a bit more time spare to write it out nicely in very neutral wording :)
EdwardLane ( talk) 15:55, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
Opinion polls showed a strong opposition to this visit, which is not reflected in this article. I also believe a bomb has just gone off in (London-)Derry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.127.115.178 ( talk) 17:00, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
In the article the Irish police force are referred to as the 'Gardai' but this would seem to be out of sync with general Wikipedia practice of simply referring to local police as the 'police' ( Gardai = the police force of the Republic of Ireland). On other pages about non-English possible or terrorist attacks (e.g. Piazza Fontana bombing) the simple term police is used rather than the local word for such. Thoughts? Grand High Most Supreme Hochmeister of Wikipedia and the Universe (including Ireland and Wales) 22:19, 21 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trumpkin ( talk • contribs)
The majority of English speakers don't live in India either, and we still use the word crore in India related articles. -- Eraserhead1 < talk> 17:21, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
Sock investigation has been endorsed for checkuser against Earlymorningcans (who lists lots of B&I sock masters on his page), Trumkin has around 20 edits in 2006, 2 in 2008 then a sudden recent flurry in parallel with the sockmaster. WP:DUCK applies. -- Snowded TALK 18:11, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
It appears that Earlymorningcans has been revealed as an evil sock puppet, as such I would agree that unfortunately no consensus has been reached. Grand High Most Supreme Hochmeister of Wikipedia and the Universe (including Ireland and Wales) ( talk) 08:46, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
I observe that the article Lansdowne Road football riot uses the term "Gardai". Maproom ( talk) 23:37, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
The word 'cannon' on the page (water cannons) seems to keep being reverted to 'cannons'. The word cannon is the British English plural which would seem more appropriate (see cannon - "Cannon serves both as the singular and plural of the noun, although the plural cannons is also accepted in American English"), could people make sure that this does not keep getting reverted? Thanks Grand High Most Supreme Hochmeister of Wikipedia and the Universe (including Ireland and Wales) 22:23, 21 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trumpkin ( talk • contribs)
I fail to see the relevance of placing a NPOV tag on the protest and counter demonstrations section. It really is just a list of protests and I fail to detect any bias in the section. Exiledone ( talk) 13:02, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
I want to put a [sic] after this (in the quote by Adams) because there is no Queen of England and hasn't been since the Act of Union 1707. It seems a couple of people disagree with me. So let's discuss. JonChapple Talk 06:30, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Does anyone else have anything to add? JonChapple Talk 15:02, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
Can we re-start the discussion on this now? Such a tag makes small sections like that very untidy indeed too, esp when it seems to be unessential. The only bias that was there has now been removed from what I can see -- Τασουλα (Shalom!) ( talk) 14:17, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
"THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT IS ISSUED BY THE PRESS SECRETARY TO THE QUEEN - The Queen has been pleased to accept an invitation from the President of Ireland to pay a State Visit to Ireland this year. The Queen will be accompanied by The Duke of Edinburgh." Source: [29]
Does the fact that Her Majesty herself respects the name of the Irish state matter at all here? NelsonSudan ( talk) 21:54, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
No one here is talking about original research...Thanks. I will get started with a few edits. NelsonSudan ( talk) 19:40, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
May I remind all editors that there is a large notice at the top of this page warning that the article is under the one-revert rule. Contentious edits should be discussed before they are made. DrKay ( talk) 20:24, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
I've added this in near the top - NelsonSudan ( talk) 20:10, 19 July 2011 (UTC) Visit announced The Queen's visit was formally announced by both Buckingham Palace and Áras an Uachtaráin simultaneously on 4 March 2011. The Queen's announcement read simply: [1]
The Queen has been pleased to accept an invitation from the President of Ireland to pay a State Visit to Ireland this year. The Queen will be accompanied by The Duke of Edinburgh.
The announcenment came as no great surprise in so far as the visit had been signalled by both Governments as likely. The United Kingdom Ambassoador to Ireland, Mr David Reddaway, as early as 2009 had described a visit by the Queen as "imminent". [2]
References
The Article says: "The Union Flag flew alongside the Irish tricolour and the flag of the European Union outside the Merrion Hotel opposite Government Buildings as she touched down on Irish soil." [1] I've deleted the sentence because I don't really see why it deserves mention....The Merrion Hotel is just a private hotel in Dublin. NelsonSudan ( talk) 17:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
References
I think it would be far better if the Itinerary sections were brought up to just under "Visit Announced" and all the background followed the Itinerary. There are several reasons; this is an article about the visit.........Why should a reader have to wade through all this historical background stuff (most of which they will be well familiar with if they have found their way to an article so specific as the Queen's visit)...But they wont know what she actually did in the country. Its pretty well written and concise and I think it should be brought up...
The background etc and media stuff etc can all stay in but should follow affter the itinerary. Thats my suggestion.....There is little of interest in it compared to the itinerary...After all, hordes of media always follow the Queen...but the Queen has only visited the Rock of Cashel once....! NelsonSudan ( talk) 18:07, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
Wouldn't a better title for this article be "Queen Elizabeth II's state visit to the Republic of Ireland?" As the first sentence in the lead paragraph of the article shows that it was a state visit, surely it would be an improvement to include this fact in the title? Glenmeister ( talk) 19:05, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Queen Elizabeth II's state visit to the Republic of Ireland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 03:01, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Queen Elizabeth II's state visit to the Republic of Ireland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:45, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved. ( non-admin closure) Simplexity22 ( talk) 16:33, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
Queen Elizabeth II's state visit to the Republic of Ireland →
State visit of Elizabeth II to the Republic of Ireland – The title doesn't look encyclopedic because it uses an apostrophe for the possessive.
2601:183:101:58D0:21FA:6823:6996:3DB1 (
talk)
13:55, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 06:52, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 17 May 2011. The result of the discussion was speedy keep. |
![]() | A news item involving State visit by Elizabeth II to the Republic of Ireland was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 17 May 2011. | ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Troubles, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
[4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25] Strange Passerby ( talk • cont) 09:25, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
As it's a four day visit, it would seem logical to have a section for each day of the visit. Another possibility is a section on international reaction to the visit, should there be any. Mjroots ( talk) 11:04, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Perhaps the title of the article should be changed to "Queen Elizabeth II's visit to the Republic of Ireland as seen by the Guardian"? -- 89.216.218.134 ( talk) 16:21, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
To me the repeated references to "Elizabeth II" read very, very oddly indeed. OK I am not the most fanatical obsessive about royal matters (I fear I read the wrong newspaper, in fact ^^) but surely it's normal, without subscribing to any particular school of thought or PoV, to just call her "the Queen" since I think we've established which particular queen the article is about? "Liz" would seem a bit informal and "the Queen" does seem to be a pretty common usage. Well, not common common, that would be vulgar of me, but you know what I mean. Best wishes DBaK ( talk) 16:36, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Referring to her as "Elizabeth" is as crass as referring to President McAleese as "Mary" or President Obama as "Barack", but then this entire page reads as if it has been edited by Gerry Adams.-- Wessexboy ( talk) 19:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Really? Henry VIII uses the term "Henry" throughout the article. Louis XIV does too. And it's not exactly the same thing as using the "Barack" for the President, as it's acceptable to use "Obama" for him, and Elizabeth doesn't have a surname per se (we don't use the honorific "Mr. Obama" or "President Obama" on the site). Hot Stop (c) 04:17, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
It may have escaped people's notice that while "the Queen" is correct while she is in Britain (and I assume Commonwealth states), but it is not correct while she is in Ireland. She is not the Irish monarch. O Fenian ( talk) 07:15, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
Another reason to object to the usage "Queen Elizabeth II" is that, while she is Queen Elizabeth II of England and Wales, she is Queen Elizabeth of Scotland. Maproom ( talk) 10:45, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
FYI, the article Elizabeth II uses just "Elizabeth" at times. Hot Stop (c) 14:41, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Reading this article and remembering what I have seen deleted, edited and derided in other articles, I am surprised that the lack of balance has managed to escape the usually vigilant eyes of all those scissor happy editors. Can it be that the criticism that this is a Guardian article or edited by Gerry Adams isn't far off the mark? This is supposed to be a factual encyclopedia not an exemplar of current political correctness. User:jkslouth 00:19, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
At the time of writing, the Responses section contains descriptions of objections to the visit and difficulties caused in Dublin by security restrictions. This documentation of the negative consequences of the visit needs to be balanced by an account of the welcome the Queen has received and of the assertions by various public figures, media, and members of the public of the positive significance of the visit. In addition, vox-pop interviews on RTÉ television revealed individuals who had neutral reactions or who didn't care about the visit one way or the other. Reactions in Ireland are more diverse than the present Responses section describes, and it merits expansion. — O'Dea ( talk) 09:50, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
There seem to be a lot of people pushing an Irish republican agenda here to the point where the page appears to have been hijacked, with all edits that attempt to restore non-POV removed almost instantly. -- Wessexboy ( talk) 12:25, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
OK, the whole responses section needs a massive cleanup. Its clearly very one-sided, the rest of the article looks fairly anti-Queen too. I've seen a lot of positive coverage about the visit - the BBC has been very positive - so there are plenty of places to address the issues. I'm sure its expensive etc. and that should be mentioned too, but that shouldn't be the only thing that's mentioned. -- Eraserhead1 < talk> 07:28, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
This whole article has been transformed - well done guys. It was a total cake-and-arse party yesterday so congratulations to whoever sorted it out.-- 2.96.93.8 ( talk) 18:12, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
The Queen's arrival in the Republic of Ireland coincided with the 37th anniversary of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings. On 17 May 1974, 33 civilians were killed and almost 300 wounded when four car bombs exploded (three in Dublin, one in Monaghan) without warning. A loyalist paramilitary group, the Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF), claimed responsibility for the bombings in 1993. There are allegations, however, that members of the British security forces colluded with the loyalists.[52]
An inquiry into the attacks was published in 2003. However, the inquiry was hindered somewhat by the British government's refusal to release its official documents about the bombings.[53] An Oireachtas Committee found that the alleged involvement of British security forces could not be ruled out unless the files were released.[53] Victims' group Justice for the Forgotten called the visit a "golden opportunity" for the British government to release the files. Its spokeswoman, Margaret Urwin, said: "As prime minister David Cameron will accompany [the Queen] and is due to meet our Taoiseach Enda Kenny tomorrow, we believe this occasion affords Mr Cameron...a golden opportunity to make a genuine significant gesture of reconciliation".[54] The group appealed to the Queen and Cameron in an open letter that was issued on 16 May.[55] In the Dáil, Sinn Féin put forward a motion urging the Taoiseach to discuss the matter with PM Cameron when he arrives to accompany the Queen.[53]
What is everyone's opinion about this page's place in relation to Wikipedia:ARBCOM/TROUBLES#Final_remedies_for_AE_case? Would this article "reasonably" (second point of the AE ruling) be construed as being related to "The Troubles, Irish nationalism, and British nationalism in relation to Ireland"? Strange Passerby ( talk • cont) 03:06, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
I take a dim view of edits like this which attempt to draw a link between the irrelevant SNP electoral victory, its promise for Scottish independence, and this visit. They are totally unrelated. Strange Passerby ( talk • cont) 05:33, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
Why was this REMOVED when sourced [26]?And the refs? [27]( Lihaas ( talk) 08:21, 18 May 2011 (UTC)).
Will this be put back up for AFD when it is removed from the main page? I personally don't think this should be its own article, but rather incorporated into an article about state visits by the queen or from monarchs of the UK if such an article exists. Ryan Vesey ( talk) 03:21, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
I pulled this from the from page because of the NPOV tag, any chance of resolving the issues soon? RxS ( talk) 03:51, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
"Two water cannon have been imported to deal with any disorder that may arise."
This information is not about "itinerary". It is about security arrangements. Wanderer57 ( talk) 12:42, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
This is potentially misleading, this was not specifically planned. It is protocol for every visiting head of state to visit the Garden of Remembrance and lay a wreath, see here for example. O Fenian ( talk) 20:53, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
[28]. The Irish Free state ceased to exist in 1937, so a sentence reading "while the Irish Free State had by 1949" is totally wrong. Like I said when I reverted it, but it got changed to something wrong yet again. O Fenian ( talk) 23:49, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Just thought I'd mention that the main bit of coverage on the BBC day 2 seemed to be about the Queen's speech. That she'd started in Gaelic "A Uachtarain agus a chairde (President and friends)" [1](which drew the Irish prime minister to say 'wow' under her breath) [2] - and that seemed a pretty significant 'concession' from the Queen (as it was suggested she could 'not' apologise).
The other relevant tagline that kept being repeated was that 'with historical hindsight we can all see things which we would wish had been done differently or not at all' [3]
I'd think that the Queen's speech could make a subsection of this article - but I am not so 'bold' as to jump in there without a bit more time spare to write it out nicely in very neutral wording :)
EdwardLane ( talk) 15:55, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
Opinion polls showed a strong opposition to this visit, which is not reflected in this article. I also believe a bomb has just gone off in (London-)Derry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.127.115.178 ( talk) 17:00, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
In the article the Irish police force are referred to as the 'Gardai' but this would seem to be out of sync with general Wikipedia practice of simply referring to local police as the 'police' ( Gardai = the police force of the Republic of Ireland). On other pages about non-English possible or terrorist attacks (e.g. Piazza Fontana bombing) the simple term police is used rather than the local word for such. Thoughts? Grand High Most Supreme Hochmeister of Wikipedia and the Universe (including Ireland and Wales) 22:19, 21 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trumpkin ( talk • contribs)
The majority of English speakers don't live in India either, and we still use the word crore in India related articles. -- Eraserhead1 < talk> 17:21, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
Sock investigation has been endorsed for checkuser against Earlymorningcans (who lists lots of B&I sock masters on his page), Trumkin has around 20 edits in 2006, 2 in 2008 then a sudden recent flurry in parallel with the sockmaster. WP:DUCK applies. -- Snowded TALK 18:11, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
It appears that Earlymorningcans has been revealed as an evil sock puppet, as such I would agree that unfortunately no consensus has been reached. Grand High Most Supreme Hochmeister of Wikipedia and the Universe (including Ireland and Wales) ( talk) 08:46, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
I observe that the article Lansdowne Road football riot uses the term "Gardai". Maproom ( talk) 23:37, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
The word 'cannon' on the page (water cannons) seems to keep being reverted to 'cannons'. The word cannon is the British English plural which would seem more appropriate (see cannon - "Cannon serves both as the singular and plural of the noun, although the plural cannons is also accepted in American English"), could people make sure that this does not keep getting reverted? Thanks Grand High Most Supreme Hochmeister of Wikipedia and the Universe (including Ireland and Wales) 22:23, 21 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trumpkin ( talk • contribs)
I fail to see the relevance of placing a NPOV tag on the protest and counter demonstrations section. It really is just a list of protests and I fail to detect any bias in the section. Exiledone ( talk) 13:02, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
I want to put a [sic] after this (in the quote by Adams) because there is no Queen of England and hasn't been since the Act of Union 1707. It seems a couple of people disagree with me. So let's discuss. JonChapple Talk 06:30, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Does anyone else have anything to add? JonChapple Talk 15:02, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
Can we re-start the discussion on this now? Such a tag makes small sections like that very untidy indeed too, esp when it seems to be unessential. The only bias that was there has now been removed from what I can see -- Τασουλα (Shalom!) ( talk) 14:17, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
"THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT IS ISSUED BY THE PRESS SECRETARY TO THE QUEEN - The Queen has been pleased to accept an invitation from the President of Ireland to pay a State Visit to Ireland this year. The Queen will be accompanied by The Duke of Edinburgh." Source: [29]
Does the fact that Her Majesty herself respects the name of the Irish state matter at all here? NelsonSudan ( talk) 21:54, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
No one here is talking about original research...Thanks. I will get started with a few edits. NelsonSudan ( talk) 19:40, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
May I remind all editors that there is a large notice at the top of this page warning that the article is under the one-revert rule. Contentious edits should be discussed before they are made. DrKay ( talk) 20:24, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
I've added this in near the top - NelsonSudan ( talk) 20:10, 19 July 2011 (UTC) Visit announced The Queen's visit was formally announced by both Buckingham Palace and Áras an Uachtaráin simultaneously on 4 March 2011. The Queen's announcement read simply: [1]
The Queen has been pleased to accept an invitation from the President of Ireland to pay a State Visit to Ireland this year. The Queen will be accompanied by The Duke of Edinburgh.
The announcenment came as no great surprise in so far as the visit had been signalled by both Governments as likely. The United Kingdom Ambassoador to Ireland, Mr David Reddaway, as early as 2009 had described a visit by the Queen as "imminent". [2]
References
The Article says: "The Union Flag flew alongside the Irish tricolour and the flag of the European Union outside the Merrion Hotel opposite Government Buildings as she touched down on Irish soil." [1] I've deleted the sentence because I don't really see why it deserves mention....The Merrion Hotel is just a private hotel in Dublin. NelsonSudan ( talk) 17:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
References
I think it would be far better if the Itinerary sections were brought up to just under "Visit Announced" and all the background followed the Itinerary. There are several reasons; this is an article about the visit.........Why should a reader have to wade through all this historical background stuff (most of which they will be well familiar with if they have found their way to an article so specific as the Queen's visit)...But they wont know what she actually did in the country. Its pretty well written and concise and I think it should be brought up...
The background etc and media stuff etc can all stay in but should follow affter the itinerary. Thats my suggestion.....There is little of interest in it compared to the itinerary...After all, hordes of media always follow the Queen...but the Queen has only visited the Rock of Cashel once....! NelsonSudan ( talk) 18:07, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
Wouldn't a better title for this article be "Queen Elizabeth II's state visit to the Republic of Ireland?" As the first sentence in the lead paragraph of the article shows that it was a state visit, surely it would be an improvement to include this fact in the title? Glenmeister ( talk) 19:05, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Queen Elizabeth II's state visit to the Republic of Ireland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 03:01, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Queen Elizabeth II's state visit to the Republic of Ireland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:45, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved. ( non-admin closure) Simplexity22 ( talk) 16:33, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
Queen Elizabeth II's state visit to the Republic of Ireland →
State visit of Elizabeth II to the Republic of Ireland – The title doesn't look encyclopedic because it uses an apostrophe for the possessive.
2601:183:101:58D0:21FA:6823:6996:3DB1 (
talk)
13:55, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 06:52, 8 July 2022 (UTC)