Talk:Irish states since 1171

message: This article and the infobox of Irish-states seems to have a very Anglo-Centric view of Irish history. It makes no mention of the Irish High Kings or the old Irish kingdoms (Ulster, Connaught etc). I feel that this needs to be adressed but am not even sure where to start it.GiollaUidir 16:26, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pre-1171 Kingdoms

message: The situation prior to 1171 was not quite as loose as has been suggested. Ireland prior to the Anglo-Norman invasion of 1169 was hardly less unitary than the typical European proto-state of the time and is probably best described as a national kingdom lacking a settled monarchy.
The most recent changes were inaccurate in a couple of respects. 
* A declaration of independence may indeed have been made in 1916 but it had no validity. Those declaring it had no legal authority or right to make such a declaration. However Dail Eireann, as the assembly of Ireland's political representatives, were legally and politically entitled to make such a declaration, and it did in January 1919. While some in the Dail argued that they were only ratifying the earlier declaration, the fact that they felt it necessary to do so shows the true status of the 1916 declaration. As a result, most historians, political scientists and politicians regard 1919 as the real date for the declaration of independence, and the text has been changed back to reflect that. 
* Article 4 of the Bunreacht, through rather strange wording, gives priority to the name 'Eire' over 'Ireland'. This is reflected in everything from the banner heading over Acts of the Oireachtas to coinage. In addition the confusion over the two territories mentioned in the old Articles 2 and 3 meant that Eire was sometimes used as the new name for the old Saorstat (26 counties) with Ireland used interchangably for 26 or 32. As the english language version of Article 4 starts off using Eire, that format is used here too. In fact Eire is not used internationally except in rare circumstances. FearÉIREANN 10:30, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Older Discussion

message: Shouldn't Free Derry be added to the list of "See also" at the bottom of the template on this article?
ie Confederate Ireland | Republic of Connaught | Éire | Northern Ireland | Republic of Munster
Free Derry was a de facto independent state like the Republic of Connacht, etc.  It lasted around a year, so maybe it should be added?
Republoic of Wexford as well?
Any opinions?
:Weak Yes.GiollaUidir 14:48, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Prob best to raise the issue on the talk page of the template? Djegan 19:42, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Free Derry 

message: This page is ballin', and it's a crying shame there doesn't seem to be anything else like it for the other 200 some nation states. 130.85.224.28 21:37, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Analogous pages for other countries? 

message: I don't think the so-called Munster Republic should be included in the timeline. As the article explains, it was simply a term used for the territory largely controlled by the Anti-Treaty IRA (for a very brief period). Unlike the Republic of Connaught or Free Derry, it was never formally declared as a state.
Opinions? ~Asarlaí 21:41, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Munster Republic 

message: Shouldn't the "Irish Constitutional" period should begin with the adoption of the Irish Constitution? 
The Irish Free State was a dominion under the sovereignty of the crown. Why would that not still be British Constitutional period?
Even if you place the Irish Republic in the Irish Constitutional period, the IFS was a reversion to / acceptance of continuing British constitutionalism until the king was replaced as sovereign by the people.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.124.88.45 (talk) 23:12, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Irish Constitutional Period and the Irish Free State