Talk:Ireland (disambiguation)

message: A poll is currently underway to determine the rendition of the island, nation-state, and disambiguation articles/titles for Ireland in Wp.  Please weigh in! E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 08:32, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Talk:Republic_of_Ireland#Poll:_Ireland_article_titles|Poll: Ireland article titles]] 

message: 'Ireland' often refers to both polities collectively. They encompass more then just the island of Ireland and therefore deserve an additional entry:
There's no need for a Northern Ireland listing. We are disambiguating what the term 'Ireland' is used to refer to, not what is part of 'Ireland'.
Rob (talk | contribs) 00:29, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arbitrary break 

message: I've opened a straw poll on support for a change to the title of the Republic of Ireland article and related articles. --sony-youthtalk 21:30, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Straw poll of Republic of Ireland title change 

message: move Ireland to Ireland (island), Republic of Ireland to Ireland (state), and Ireland (disambiguation) to Ireland. This was a complex proposal encompassing three distinct discussions. The detailed reasoning can be read at User talk:Tariqabjotu#My response -- Rockpocket 22:38, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This should be discussed at Talk:Ireland. Angus McLellan  (Talk) 12:06, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Notification of this discussion was provided on Talk:Ireland on 30th October by Angus so all editors there have had time to participate.  --Snowded TALK 12:21, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, but this is yet another request, not the same one as in October. Angus McLellan  (Talk) 12:23, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Have you looked at Talk:Ireland?  Particularly  and , not to mention this? waggers (talk) 13:36, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

text: Agree that it's only common courtesy to inform them.  Scolaire (talk) 22:17, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have also informed Wikipedia:WikiProject Northern Ireland, they have an interest in the island too, after all. Rockpocket 01:21, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Comment - if it does then it will be contrary to consensus, policy and every Wiki-norm and will be (1) a triumph for WP:BIAS and (2) a never-ending source of controversy and disruption. It is simply wrong. Utterly and totally wrong. Just how many times, in how many different places must we reach the same conclusion before somebody decides to be WP:BOLD and actually apply policy and consensus? (That someone is preferably not me, but most assuredly will be me if this filibustering does not cease).  Sarah777 (talk) 01:38, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Point of information: it most assuredly will not be you, Sarah, unless you plan an RfA anytime soon. You don't have the necessary buttons, I'm afraid. Rockpocket 01:56, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: S*it! Sarah777 (talk) 02:13, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

text: "moratorium" ? For how many more years? Sarah777 (talk) 02:18, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed move to Ireland 

message: Ireland now is a disambiguation page.  Other articles affected in this renaming include:
*Ireland (state) aka Republic of Ireland
*Ireland (island)
--Una Smith (talk) 15:48, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: This article now a disambiguation page

message: I will revert the page to the status quo protect it if the above policies are breached regarding the Republic of Ireland. It's just not open to negotation as the policy is clear. It would be far more productive to get the appropriate Ireland (state) page move than to pretend it's already happened by piping and forking the content, would it not? No wonder the move never happens... --Jza84 |  Talk   22:01, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:SELF]] and [[WP:D]] 

message: Can we now expolre this?
Ireland commonly refers to:
*Ireland (state), the country in northwestern Europe
*Ireland (island), the island in northwestern Europe, on which are located:
**Ireland (state), a sovereign state
**Northern Ireland, a constituent country of the United Kingdom[1]
:This fully disambiguates now, IMO. Matt Lewis
————
Well, I'd have to say that I dislike the redundancy there. I prefer:
Ireland may refer commonly refers to:
*Ireland (island), an island in northwestern Europe, on which are located:
**Ireland (state), a sovereign state called by that name since 1937; also described as the Republic of Ireland
**Northern Ireland, a constituent country of the United Kingdom.
The island has formerly been subject to a number of political arrangements (arranged in reverse chronological order):
* Irish Free State, the name, from 1922 to 1937, of the state comprising 26 of Ireland's 32 counties
* Irish Republic, the unilaterally declared independent state between 1919 and 1922, also sometimes wrongly used to describe the current state
* Southern Ireland, the 26-county Irish state envisaged by the Government of Ireland Act 1920
* United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, the name of the state that Ireland formed part of between 1801 and 1922
* Kingdom of Ireland, the name given to the Irish state from 1541, by an act of the Parliament of Ireland
** King of Ireland, its ruler
* Lordship of Ireland, a nominally all-island Irish state created in the wake of the Norman invasion of the east coast of Ireland in 1169
* Gaelic Ireland, the political order that existed in Ireland prior to the Norman invasion
Surely that is sufficient? Let's not play games about the dominant order (trying to put the State above the Island). Note the link for RoI goes to the 1948 Act article. I think I have addressed most of the concerns here. -- Evertype·✆ 17:02, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: We found that state use (not geographical use) is the dominant use on Wikpedia. I don't see the point in using "may" any more - this is main page now for both articles. Putting the island first means duplicating the state in an awkward way. (PS you can see the 'sign' from the history list - I'm not playing games as I'm sure you know (I'm just very busy!)) --Matt Lewis (talk) 17:06, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You know, it may be the "dominant" use on the Wikipedia, but that doesn't mean that it is right to rank it this way. For one, it will annoy some people. Please let us be gracious. For another, the island is the superset and the two political units found within it. The way I arranged is not all that awkward; "Ireland (state), a sovereign state" does not seem more awkward to me than repeating Ireland (state) twice. You are right about "may". -- Evertype·✆ 17:12, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Would "a sovereign and independent state" give more space? -- Evertype·✆ 17:18, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I almost put "a sovereign country" after Ireland (state) in my version, but I thought I'd keep it simple. Most countries don't have to desribe their independence in such a way - and I think it's pretty clear to everyone now. We mustn't forget that Ireland (state) will be covering the all-era Irish nation too. --Matt Lewis (talk) 17:33, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the word "country" is problematic and ill-defined—particularly in light of the fact that "constituent country" is used for NI. "State" is unambiguous in the context. I'm afraid I'm still not convinced that your proposed reorganization is the right way to do it. -- Evertype·✆ 17:54, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: "Country" is the Wikpedia standard here - I don't see the ambiguity, to be honest. One reason for its general use is that sovereign states normally cover the country across history - not just as a modern state. Regarding the order, it depends which you think the use of 'Ireland' most commonly refers to - the island or the state. It is the common name (and offical name) for the Irish state, so surely that use has to be used more commonly. We can prove the country meaning is used more on Wikipedia anyway.--Matt Lewis (talk) 18:03, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There's nothing "surely" about it. I don't care that the pages have been moved, but I will fight against this notion of treating the state as the victor and heir of all Irish history. It's OTT POV. Nuclare (talk) 18:09, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Matt, I accept that you do not find "country" to be ambiguous, but it is, and as you can see from Nuclare's comment, your proposed formulation is controversial. (Nuclare, may I ask you to comment on mine? I have attempted to be neutral.) Re: "country" again, nothing prevents that sort of content from being in the Ireland (state) article, but this dab page isn't meant to do all of that. Regarding your suggestion that the state might be more common on the Wikipedia, I will say again, that even if we stipulate that, it does not mean that it should take first place on this page. The superset island should precede and its political subdivisions after at second level. Anything else is just too POV, or will be seen to be so. Please review my formulation. -- Evertype·✆ 18:21, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, but using any dates is a bad idea, I think. How about these thankfully alphabetical offerings (C and D):
===The first few lines (poll):===
A.
Ireland commonly refers to:
*Ireland (state), a sovereign state in northwestern Europe
*Ireland (island), an island in northwestern Europe
B.
Ireland commonly refers to:
*Ireland (state), a sovereign state in northwestern Europe
*Ireland (island), an island in northwestern Europe, on which are located:
**Ireland (state), a sovereign state
**Northern Ireland, a constituent country of the United Kingdom[1]
C.
Ireland commonly refers to:
*Ireland (island), an island in northwestern Europe
*Ireland (state), a sovereign state in northwestern Europe
D.
Ireland commonly refers to:
*Ireland (island), an island in northwestern Europe, on which are located:
**Ireland (state), a sovereign state
**Northern Ireland, a constituent country of the United Kingdom[1]
*Ireland (state)
E.
CURRENT:
Ireland may refer to:
*Ireland (island), an island in northwestern Europe, on which are located:
**Ireland (state), a sovereign state
**Northern Ireland, a constituent country of the United Kingdom[1]
F
Ireland commonly refers to:
*Ireland (island), an island in northwestern Europe, on which are located:
**Ireland (state), a sovereign state called by that name since 1937; also described as the Republic of Ireland
**Northern Ireland, a constituent country of the United Kingdom.
Then I personally think we should go straight on to 'Place names' etc (which now won't be too hidden down the page). We can use a No-contents tag, perhaps. I think we need to start by paring this down per policy - that is how we got here, after all. I put the island at the top, per Evertype's suggestion - but IMO it scans a much better if the state is at the top (and is per common use too, though not alphabetical). I do think Ireland (state) should feature on its own too - if we must lose one, it should be the one under the island, along with NI. I would accept the graphic, per Nuclare's guideline find, but on reflection it would probably need to stay on the right. I think the term "sovereign state" can cover every feeling and every period(?). I'm straw-polling it (why not) so add another letter if you have another idea. --Matt Lewis (talk) 06:54, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

text: It is called a "first few lines" poll - not that and the next section in one option! And don't ever change my letters (in my signed vote) again. The section below the first few lines is another issue! We can't poll an apple with oranges.--Matt Lewis (talk) 12:51, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Matt, you do not own the Wikipedia. I think your reversion was done in bad faith. I'm sorry to be at loggerheads with you. I don't like your taking my proposal off the table. -- Evertype·✆ 12:54, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I do own my own edits! You have a single issue with the "Former political entities" section. You can't just append it as an extra option to a separate and running poll - that isn't logical at all. Just start a poll on it if you want: Shall we keep the "Former political entities" section? YES/NO. --Matt Lewis (talk) 13:20, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unprotect Request and revised Intro 

message: A.
Ireland commonly refers to:
*Ireland (state), a sovereign state in northwestern Europe
*Ireland (island), an island in northwestern Europe
B.
Ireland commonly refers to:
*Ireland (state), a sovereign state in northwestern Europe
*Ireland (island), an island in northwestern Europe, on which are located:
**Ireland (state), a sovereign state
**Northern Ireland, a constituent country of the United Kingdom[1]
C.
Ireland commonly refers to:
*Ireland (island), an island in northwestern Europe
*Ireland (state), a sovereign state in northwestern Europe
D.
Ireland commonly refers to:
*Ireland (island), an island in northwestern Europe, on which are located:
**Ireland (state), a sovereign state
**Northern Ireland, a constituent country of the United Kingdom[1]
*Ireland (state)
E.
CURRENT:
Ireland may refer to:
*Ireland (island), an island in northwestern Europe, on which are located:
**Ireland (state), a sovereign state
**Northern Ireland, a constituent country of the United Kingdom[1]
F
Ireland commonly refers to:
*Ireland (island), an island in northwestern Europe, on which are located:
**Ireland (state), a sovereign state called by that name since 1937; also described as the Republic of Ireland
**Northern Ireland, a constituent country of the United Kingdom.
Then I personally think we should go straight on to 'Place names' etc (which now won't be too hidden down the page). We can use a No-contents tag, perhaps. I think we need to start by paring this down per policy - that is how we got here, after all. I put the island at the top, per Evertype's suggestion - but IMO it scans a much better if the state is at the top (and is per common use too, though not alphabetical). I do think Ireland (state) should feature on its own too - if we must lose one, it should be the one under the island, along with NI. I would accept the graphic, per Nuclare's guideline find, but on reflection it would probably need to stay on the right. I think the term "sovereign state" can cover every feeling and every period(?). I'm straw-polling it (why not) so add another letter if you have another idea. --Matt Lewis (talk) 06:54, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It is called a "first few lines" poll - not that and the next section in one option! And don't ever change my letters (in my signed vote) again. The section below the first few lines is another issue! We can't poll an apple with oranges.--Matt Lewis (talk) 12:51, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Matt, you do not own the Wikipedia. I think your reversion was done in bad faith. I'm sorry to be at loggerheads with you. I don't like your taking my proposal off the table. -- Evertype·✆ 12:54, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I do own my own edits! You have a single issue with the "Former political entities" section. You can't just append it as an extra option to a separate and running poll - that isn't logical at all. Just start a poll on it if you want: Shall we keep the "Former political entities" section? YES/NO. --Matt Lewis (talk) 13:20, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: The first few lines (poll):

message: The issue is a recurring one. Proponents wanted:
* Ireland → Ireland (island) (or a variation)
* Republic of Ireland → Ireland (state) (or a variation)
* Ireland (disambiguation) → Ireland (or a variation)
Several different polls were opened simultaneously on (old page names):
* Ireland
* Ireland (disambiguation)
* Ireland disambiguation task force
A related poll had been run exactly one month earlier at (old page name):
* Republic of Ireland
And one month before then again also at (old page name):
* Republic of Ireland (archive)
Participation at the Ireland page was widest and consensus was against the move. Participation on two (recent) polls at the Republic of Ireland page also had wide participation and fell heavily against the move (both were closed). Participation at the disambiguation and task force pages were limited, but consensus in those polls came down (weakly) in favour of the move.
On this occasion the closing admin was:
* 
Initially, Tariqabjotu performed the move request in error - having only seen the request at the task force page. When this was brought to his attention, he posted a response on this talk page. His decision was to maintain the move against consensus as consensus had arrived at "an illogical conclusion" (which he linked to Wikipedia:Polling is not a substitute for discussion). Later, he would comment that he had not read the discussions because, "There's so much stuff to wade through...".
Issues believed to be at play:
* Forum shopping
* Vote stacking
* Consensus
* Polling is not a substitute for discussion
(Some) issues at play during the discussion:
* Disambiguation: Is there a primary topic?
* Naming convetions: Controversial names
--89.101.221.42 (talk) 10:34, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OBJECTION: What kind of 'summary' is this? The "propenents wanted.." section above is selective.. where are the non-forked 'Ireland' options that opened the WP:IDTF taskforce? (ie Ireland as either state or island, but not both and not part of a dual state situation with Republic of Ireland??) The IP has ignored all the many main issues, and all the problems that have got us here, too.  Why are we letting this particular IP do this? I propose archiving this section, as it is clearly disrupting (and made to disrupt) the discussion and progress being made above it. He is spamming it all over Wikpedia too.--Matt Lewis (talk) 20:48, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've moved the content discussion that was sidelined above this to the bottom of the page. This page will be unlocked soon, and it too important to ignore. --Matt Lewis (talk) 20:54, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Can we stop with the refactoring of the page? It isn't helping, it just makes it f-ing confusing as things flit around the page. There is clearly distaste for the manner of the move Matt, you can't just sweep it away into an archive because you dislike the methods applied being questioned.  --Narson ~ Talk •  21:16, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I simply moved the ongoing main-page discussion below this interjection - that approach is usually the advised way, and I'm not trying to hide anything. This disam page will be UN-LOCKED very soon people - we must sort out what we want for the opening lines (even if it is to agree with what we have), or it will simply get locked again. That is perfectly logical and reasonable, isn't it? --Matt Lewis (talk) 00:43, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Summary by [[Special:Contributions/89.101.221.42|89.101.221.42]] ([[User talk:89.101.221.42|talk]]) 

message: I think this distills the POV problems that Wiki has imposed on Ireland-related articles. Arbitrarily following (and ignoring) a myriad set of rules as enforced by (mainly non or anti-Irish-nationalist editors) we have arrived at the situation where the sovereign state whose capital is Dublin cannot have its name applied to the article about it (though it is the WP:COMMONNAME), nor can the state be called a country; but the British controlled province of Northern Ireland is (and must) be called a country (contrary to WP:COMMONNAME). Frankly, sorting this bizarre manifestation of political POV is not  something to be left in the hands of the editors and Admins who allowed it to develope. Sarah777 (talk) 21:06, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Calm! Calm! Northern Ireland is called a "constituent country" of the UK. Who said Ireland isn't a "country"? And what's wrong with "state"? -- Evertype·✆ 21:13, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: See UKCOUNTRYREFS - NI is not "British controlled", but simply "British" - will you get that into your head! The word 'province' is dated and demeaning to many, like 'principality' is for Wales. If you don't like the "state" situation regarding Ireland, then simply focus on that - DON'T make it politcal! It's not easy to get it right when the 'other side' are playing games as to what constitutes both a 'state' and a 'country'!  (ie they insist the sate can only be 1922 onwards, and the country is the whole island - and they are not all 'Britiish' either). We have an article called 'Ireland (state)' now, I favour putting "country" (and "sovereign state" too if pushed) next to it whenever we can (and use 'country' per Wikipedia 'country' standards), but we must argue our case rationally. --Matt Lewis (talk) 21:46, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

text: If you don't like the end result, you have to wonder why you supported it. This was a nothing proposal from the start. Meaningless. As came up above, where do we now mention Tory Island? Is it relevant to the island, or to the state? Or de we create a third Ireland article, the country? The answer of course like 90% of all other material, is and always was, it should be mentioned in Ireland. Now we have more redundancy, not less. All supposedly to make it simpler for the reader. And the supporters can't even decide what they meant by it (or have just actually never read the dab page policy). Mind blowing. MickMacNee (talk) 21:51, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Tory Island is part of Ireland, the Irish state, and the island archipelago too obviously - but how would it pose a problem? You are making up demons. If you did have your own preference (that is non-status quo), you have ruined your chances by being so beligerant, negative and hostile to any changes in the past. And that goes for a number of people. --Matt Lewis (talk) 22:38, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: My irony meter just exploded. MickMacNee (talk) 23:06, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: A lonely comment. When the dust settles and the mischief-makers back off, we will be fine. --Matt Lewis (talk) 23:52, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually they lack imagination these mischief makers! I can think of 20 puzzlers that would make this seem so convoluted and paradoxical straight away - the key point of all these musings is that, ironically (meter intact) they demonstrate just how badly we needed to start with an "Ireland" dab page. Imagine if the yankee editors had decided that "America" must primarily refer to the USA, or to the continent(s)? - total chaos. Now that we have a solid foundation all this is required is intelligence and good will to construct a stable edifice. Sarah777 (talk) 07:56, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: America is the perfect example of what the people who supported this move were actually supporting, a simple double primary topic dab page, that is if they actually understood the policies they were invoking. You will have noted that per the policy, 'North America' and 'South America' are not listed as disambiguations of 'America'. But you are right about the number of puzzlers that can be found. That shows what a nonsense it was to claim this move was to clear up confusion for the reader. It has merely changed it, and worse, increased the potential for duplication between two new articles, not decrease it. These points were all explained in the latest poll, that the closing admin didn't even know existed, and then didn't bother to summarize before running away from his mistake, while no other admin looks likely to posess the will or the time to fix the mess. MickMacNee (talk) 15:21, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: The current set of Wiki-formulations results in the de-facto Wiki-assertion that NI is a country but that Ireland is not.

message: Can we keep the actual article discussion at the bottom of the page? It is very important, and reverting it back to the top does no benefit to Wikipedia. The IP started a big old debate on the Moves in here - fine - join the debate, but don't force it to feature at the bottom of the page - not when we have a locked article and things to agree on. --Matt Lewis (talk) 15:21, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Nobody is forcing it anywhere. It remains in the place it was begun, per the talk page policy. Prior discussion go before it, later ones after it. Whether you like that or not, or think that is important or not, is irrelevant. MickMacNee (talk) 15:28, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What Talk Page 'policy' is that then? Article debate is supposed to be (and is allowed to be moved to) the bottom of the talk page. Otherwise if would be too easy for people like you, wouldn't it MickMacNee? I'm going to move it back, as its just too difficult to work on up there. You and the IP are responsible for stopping progress on Wikipedia. Whatever you think (or think you can wikilawyer), you have no right to do that. There is an Ireland taskforce, a MOS, a wikiproject and main aticles as well) - so don't push it. This article is locked and needs attention.--Matt Lewis (talk) 15:35, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: See WP:TALK. Your attempts to move the discussion around out of its original timeline are not only disruptve to newcomers to the page, and people revisiting to find old discussions, they obfuscate vital information on timelines of intial edits, timeline of the change to a dab page, and subsequent protections. If you revert again I will request a block at ANI for your blatant and obvious disruption, multiple people have told you your refactoring is not appropriate and confusing. There is zero justification for following a special convention just on this page just to suit you. MickMacNee (talk) 15:44, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You have no policy at all - I'm doing exactly the correct and recommended thing (admin have recommended it to me, too). --Matt Lewis (talk) 15:47, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note on article discussion 

message: Header struck by self, no longer needed MickMacNee (talk) 19:11, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: 
Admin request to restore the original timeline of this page


message: Just a chronological note. See this diff for the move. MickMacNee (talk) 16:25, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Ireland (island) is now Ireland, this page is now Ireland (disambiguation)

message: I've changed from the map which has disputed text on it to the satellite picture which no one can have a problem with. -- Evertype·✆ 09:07, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree - as per earlier comments, this article disambiguates from more than places - there's people here too, and I wouldn't advocate putting thumbnails of their faces here in the interests of fairness... --HighKing (talk) 16:58, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Right. Even the satellite picture is "decorative" here, though I think the page is better with it than without. -- Evertype·✆ 17:13, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map 

message: I have made a series of changes. I added a link to the UK and clarified (to some degree) the RoI/Ireland issue. I re-ordered the former state-names in reverse chronological order, and I moved them above the Contents box. -- Evertype·✆ 22:58, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Why are you writing a History of Ireland article on this dab page? Here are the rules: An entry must have one blue link. An entry must have the minimum amount of text to identify the target, nothing more. Each entry must be ambiguous in title to the term being disambiguated, and not merely contain the term in the title. You are not creating a dab page here, you are writing an incredible brief History of Ireland article. MickMacNee (talk) 23:21, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, Can I ask you a question? Did you actually look at what was done? Because I didn't add a single link to the page. I only re-organized them in what I considered to be a user-friendly way. So I "created" nothing. -- Evertype·✆ 00:18, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You added two links here. MickMacNee (talk) 00:29, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What is your complaint? Do you consider the change from "United Kingdom" to "United Kingdom" to be significant? Does this change constitute "writing a History of Ireland article"? Yes, you are right, I did add one entirely new link, though it was to an existing dab line. I added "called Ireland in its 1937 Constitution". Do you consider that this changes constitutes "writing a History of Ireland article"? Is it something you object to? Because it seems to me to help deal, in a gentle way, with one of the bones of contention regarding the name of the state and the island. (I note that I piped it, which I shouldn't have, s I have corrected this.) Regarding the other links, as I said, I re-organized them. They were already there. And as for the rules, I see one which you refer to. It says "Each bulleted entry should, in almost every case, have exactly one navigable (blue) link; including more than one link can confuse the reader." Certainly "should" does not mean "must"; "in almost every case" allows for exceptions. -- Evertype·✆ 09:30, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I am impressed by your unshakeable faith in your own infallibility, Mr MacNee, but I'd like to point out that it isn't a "rule", it's an "editing guideline". Biscuittin (talk) 21:10, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The above was written with tongue in cheek but there is a serious point behind it.  It seems that you are conducting a crusade, Mr MacNee, rigidly to enforce Wikipedia's rules.  This is completely contrary to the spirit of Wikipedia - see Wikipedia:Ignore all rules which "documents an official English Wikipedia policy".  Obviously, you will not accept this from me but perhaps, one day, somebody with more authority will say something similar. Biscuittin (talk) 10:39, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

text: What am I looking for? MickMacNee (talk) 16:49, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: They do not comply with the letter of WP:DAB: they include statements about history, even with links, when they help the reader figuring out what each article is about, and they include links to articles such as North Korea whose titles aren't, strictly speaking, ambiguous. -- Army1987 – Deeds, not words. 17:31, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The letter here is a recommendation. Only. -- Evertype·✆ 00:02, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I should have been clearer, that was my point. -- Army1987 – Deeds, not words. 00:55, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Top matter 

message: Concerning the Ireland page names dispute, ArbCom has issued a final decision. It has four remedies.  Per Remedy #1, please see Talk:Ireland#Content of this page --Una Smith (talk) 18:29, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ireland page name dispute 

message: A poll is up at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Ireland_Collaboration/Poll on Ireland (xxx). This is a vote on what option or options could be added in the poll regarding the naming of the Ireland and Republic of Ireland and possibly the Ireland (disambiguation) pages. The order that the choices appear in the list has been generated randomly.  Sanctions for canvassing, forum shopping, ballot stuffing, sock puppetry, meat puppetry will consist of a one-month ban, which will preclude the sanctioned from participating in the main poll which will take place after this one.  Voting will end at 21:00 (UTC) of the evening of 1 July 2009 (that is 22:00 IST and BST). -- Evertype·✆ 18:15, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poll on Ireland (xxx) 

message: There is a poll taking place here on whether or not to extend the ArbCom binding resolution, which says there may be no page move discussions for Ireland, Republic of Ireland or Ireland (disambiguation), for a further two years.  Scolaire (talk) 11:23, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poll on ArbCom resolution - Ireland article names 

message: The naming of the article at Ireland and the usage and topic of the pagename "Ireland" are up for discussion, see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ireland_Collaboration#Move "Ireland" to "Ireland (island)" or similar (June 2015) -- 70.51.203.69 (talk) 05:08, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: "Ireland"

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Ireland which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 11:14, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: Hi,  I have reverted your edit since it broke a perfectly good page whose content has been agreed on over many years - see the manifold discussions above, and on other related pages. Specifically, you removed the 'Polities located on Ireland' section, and with it the somewhat critical distinction between Éire and NI. To relegate NI to the 'See also' section smacks of political insensitivity at the very least. This a particularly emotive subject for a great many people. You also broke up a perfectly good summary of Irish history such as is not to be found anywhere else, although it does include two links with the word 'Irish' rather than 'Ireland'. 
I know this is not a portal page, and that most dab pages can and should conform to a set of rules which you have admirably put into practice on many other pages. I suggest, nevertheless, that it is not one of those pages, but rather more like Congo (disambiguation) or China (disambiguation), as mentioned above. I have worked on a number of dab pages and enjoy weeding out non-essentials or putting entries in alpha or chrono order - I just don't think this particular page lends itself to a strict and unbending interpretation of 'the rules'. MinorProphet (talk) 06:30, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: If there is encyclopedic information here (a non-article navigation page) that is not available on the encyclopedia, that information should be added to the encyclopedia in the article space. "Relegating" a partial-title match to the See also section "smacks" of MOS:DAB, not political insensitivity. -- JHunterJ (talk) 12:48, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent 'repair' 

message: Per WP:ARCA#Motion: Ireland article names - Required location of move discussions rescinded, discussions on Ireland article names no longer have to take place at WT:IECOLL. In future, they can take place on article talk pages. Scolaire (talk) 13:20, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ireland naming discussions