Jump to content

Talk:Republic of Ireland: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Domer48 (talk | contribs)
Line 26: Line 26:
: They can only go away thinking this is the name of the state if they dont read the first paragraph of the introduction which clearly says.. "The name of the state is Ireland, while the description the Republic of Ireland is sometimes used when there is a need to differentiate the state from the island". Thats if they miss the banner which i pointed out in the dif you mentioned. I agree the box at the top of the Ireland talk pages needs changing, the statement process is over people just need to be told to go there to see about the naming dispute and not to seek change here. [[User:BritishWatcher|BritishWatcher]] ([[User talk:BritishWatcher|talk]]) 13:35, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
: They can only go away thinking this is the name of the state if they dont read the first paragraph of the introduction which clearly says.. "The name of the state is Ireland, while the description the Republic of Ireland is sometimes used when there is a need to differentiate the state from the island". Thats if they miss the banner which i pointed out in the dif you mentioned. I agree the box at the top of the Ireland talk pages needs changing, the statement process is over people just need to be told to go there to see about the naming dispute and not to seek change here. [[User:BritishWatcher|BritishWatcher]] ([[User talk:BritishWatcher|talk]]) 13:35, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
::I pinged the Wikiproject, and the box has been updated.--[[User:SarekOfVulcan|SarekOfVulcan]] ([[User talk:SarekOfVulcan|talk]]) 14:14, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
::I pinged the Wikiproject, and the box has been updated.--[[User:SarekOfVulcan|SarekOfVulcan]] ([[User talk:SarekOfVulcan|talk]]) 14:14, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

The Arbitration Committee has '''not''' put in place a structure for determining the names of the disputed articles. Please provide a link? There is [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=293928737&oldid=293928460 no directive by ArbCom preventing discussion] on article talk pages. If there is such a directive, provide a diff. --<font face="Celtic">[[User:Domer48|<span style="color:#009900"><strong>Domer48</strong></span>]]<sub>''[[User talk:Domer48|<span style="color:#006600">'fenian'</span>]]''</sub></font> 19:46, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:46, 2 June 2009

Template:Outline of knowledge coverage Template:IECOLL-talk

Discussion of the name of this (and other) articles

The Arbitration Committee has put in place a structure for determining the names of the disputed articles. That structure does not involve discussing it on the individual talk pages. If you want to discuss the subject further, follow the link above. I have archived all current discussion in an attempt to get people to comply with the ArbCom's directives. If you don't like it, take it to the Administrators' Incident noticeboard. I'm declaring this an administrative action to comply with an ArbCom directive, which is not reversible, until consensus there determines I'm mistaken.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 12:00, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Concur.  Sandstein  12:16, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You "have archived all current discussion in an attempt" to prevent discussion. That Sandstein you concur is not surprising, consulting you would be consulting a butcher about the keeping of Lent. SarekOfVulcan you have been activly involved in this discussion, were unable to support your opinions of defend your position, so you closed it down. You are both setting out to mislead our readers, and preventing them from informing themselves. The Arbitration Committee has put in place a structure for determining the names of the disputed article namely Ireland. The arguement is based on nothing more than editors opinion, with not one reference to support their POV. The article text you removed illustrated this all to well. SarekOfVulcan I never violated any ArbCom's directives, you mate Sandstein said I did "what amounted to" a violation, and closed down the discussion where I set about defending myself. Why should I take it to Administrators' Incident noticeboard, and get more of the same. A joke! Only thing is, it's the readers who it's on. If you need me to provide Diff's you just have to ask. --Domer48'fenian' 13:12, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, I archived the discussion to prevent discussion IN THE WRONG PLACE. Subtle difference, but important.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 13:20, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Readers who read this article and question the misleading information, will not find any discussion here. When editors who have been involved in the discussion can still spout nonsense about this being about the State. You actions breed ignorance, with readers going away thinking RoI is the name of the State. You were activly involved in the discussion, and you closed it. At not time could you support your arguement. --Domer48'fenian' 13:25, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the state and always has been. Therefore it's not "nonsense" to say so. On the contrary, it's nonsense to claim that it is not. Mooretwin (talk) 13:53, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is a really big box at the top of the page that talks about "Ireland article names". If you feel editors might miss that, perhaps we could add something below it explaining the situation? Cheers, This flag once was redpropagandadeeds 13:31, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
They can only go away thinking this is the name of the state if they dont read the first paragraph of the introduction which clearly says.. "The name of the state is Ireland, while the description the Republic of Ireland is sometimes used when there is a need to differentiate the state from the island". Thats if they miss the banner which i pointed out in the dif you mentioned. I agree the box at the top of the Ireland talk pages needs changing, the statement process is over people just need to be told to go there to see about the naming dispute and not to seek change here. BritishWatcher (talk) 13:35, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I pinged the Wikiproject, and the box has been updated.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:14, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Arbitration Committee has not put in place a structure for determining the names of the disputed articles. Please provide a link? There is no directive by ArbCom preventing discussion on article talk pages. If there is such a directive, provide a diff. --Domer48'fenian' 19:46, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]