Talk:Southern Ireland (1921–1922)

message: It was only after the Statute Law Revision Act 2007 which repealled the Government of Ireland Act 1920 that Southern Ireland as a political entity was legally abolished. But I have found nothing that says that Southern Ireland as the term for the geographical area that the current Republic of Ireland administers was ever legally abolished. Added to that, Southern Ireland and the Free State is often used when referring to the Republic of Ireland to distinguish it frm Northern Ireland. AlwynJPie (talk) 02:34, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The political entity 's existence expired long before the SLRA tidy up, per article. Every land mass on the face of the globe, from continents to islets, has a northern and southern part. This page is for proposing improvements to the article.  As the hatnote makes clear  This article is about the 1921–22 autonomous region.  What seems to be the problem? Qexigator (talk) 08:01, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

text: Please quote in full anything which you consider supports the notion that the statutory provisions creating "Southern Ireland" remained in operation for any known and accepted purpose, and had not expired long before SLRA.  It is doubtful whether the proposition is even arguable, from the point of view of the laws of any part of the the island of Ireland, or any part of UK, or according to international law or diplomatic practice: is there anything else which could be invoked? Qexigator (talk) 13:02, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Southern Ireland still exists. 

message: The first paragraph of the present version is nearly all that is needed for the lead, at the top of the article, together with: No Government of Southern Ireland was ever established, although a Provisional Government was established pursuant to the Anglo Irish Treaty. In the narrative sequence of the article, the rest of the present lead, describing what the Act "envisaged", would be better placed to follow the content of the "Home Rule" section, which describes the situation as it was, and then letting the narrative continue with what happened as described in the section "1921 general election". Would that be acceptable? Qexigator (talk) 00:27, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shorter lead, improve narrative sequence 

message: Most people these days use the term Southern Ireland to mean the part of Ireland that is not Northern Ireland, i.e. the Republic of Ireland. Until recently I was unaware Southern Ireland was ever an official name for the larger of the two territories that the island of Ireland was partitioned into; I thought they were named Northern Ireland and the Irish Free State. I was also unaware that initially the Irish Free State covered the whole of Ireland and that Northern Ireland opted out of it. Perhaps the article should deal with the modern meaning and the political entity that was called Southern Ireland should be transfered to another article such as the Government of Southern Ireland. AlwynJPie (talk) 03:05, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  The modern meaning and use of the term Southern Ireland 

message: Copied from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ireland Collaboration:
Re this, it might not be a bad idea to move Southern Ireland. The term is far more commonly used to mean either the Irish state or the southern counties of Ireland than it is to refer to an early 20th-century political entity that never existed in fact.  is a hideous title, as well as being inaccurate, since there are no reliable sources saying that it was such a thing, but possibly "Southern Ireland (Government of Ireland Act 1920)" would be a less awful alternative. I would suggest that "Southern Ireland" should then become a redirect to Republic of Ireland, with an appropriate hatnote on that article.  Scolaire (talk) 15:54, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I would suggest a disam page, with electoral and sub-regions that also use SI. Murry1975 (talk) 18:12, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: What electoral and sub-regions would they be? Not that I disagree with your idea.  Scolaire (talk) 18:22, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  A dab page would seem far better than a simple redirect. I'm not sure what Murry1975 is referring to but no doubt we shall find out in due course. ww2censor (talk) 18:35, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

text: Redirects are just an alternative to google and not as good, if a name could be used for an article it should be unless a disambiguation page would be better. We should not move an article from a natural name just to have a redirect using the name. Thus I prefer either the article as it is or a disambiguation page - though just having two entries seems silly. Dmcq (talk) 18:50, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article title 

message: A part of the lead as of now is original research, relying on subjective interpretation of primary sources. I am replacing it with a single short sentence citing secondary sources (i.e. books).  Scolaire (talk) 18:33, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The current lede starts off with the mouthful that the country was a "de jure polity". That's not suitable. The descriptions should be similar to those for Northern Ireland as it had the exact same status. Frenchmalawi (talk) 23:41, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead 

message: Once and for all, Southern Ireland never had any real existence. For a start, the Government of Ireland Act did not even say that there would be a country called Southern Ireland (or for that matter, a country called Northern Ireland). It said there would be a parliament of Southern Ireland. But in effect there never was. Four elected member turned up to the "opening" of the parliament, elected a speaker, and adjourned sine die. There was no executive, as required by the Act. Therefore, there was no country. The 26 counties continued under the Dublin Castle administration until that administration handed over power to the Provisional Government in January 1922. The descriptions should not be similar to those for Northern Ireland because Northern Ireland convened a parliament, elected a government and became a de facto as well as a de jure polity. This lead serves as an introduction to the article and a summary of its most important aspects, and it uses proper sources, i.e. books, instead of "statutory rules" and "court circulars". Reverting to "the way it was for years" goes against the whole philosophy of Wikipedia, which is about improving articles.  Scolaire (talk) 10:10, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Southern Ireland was a de jure polity created by subdivision of Ireland named in the Government of Ireland Act 1920 as part the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland for the establishment of a parliament and other institutions for the internal government of the southern counties of Ireland. 
That is accurate and suffices when followed by the information which immediately follows. Qexigator (talk) 18:17, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't object in principle, but it won't make a lot of sense to a new reader. Is there not some better way of phrasing it? "Ireland's southern counties" is completely wrong. As the next sentence but one tells us, it was for 26 out of 32 counties – Ireland's southern counties are Kerry, Cork, Waterford and Wexford.  Scolaire (talk) 23:27, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Better, but still not explaining the article well. The Act didn't just select 26 counties, or about five-sixths of the island, at random, it partitioned the country into Northern Ireland and "Southern Ireland". If it's to be phrased that way, it would be better to say "...for the establishment of a parliament and other institutions for the internal government of Ireland, minus the six counties of Northern Ireland", or some such.  Scolaire (talk) 23:56, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead again 

message: As mentioned in a recent edit summary calling SI a 'de jure polity' is unsuited to the lead. I do not see that wording sourced anywhere, and 'polity' is an unusual word, which we should avoid if some other wording can be used. Given the bare facts described in the article, would the following revision to the first sentence be acceptable?
:Southern Ireland was a de jure polity created by subdivision of Ireland named in the Government of Ireland Act 1920 as part the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland for the establishment of a parliament and other institutions for the internal government of the southern counties of Ireland. 
That is accurate and suffices when followed by the information which immediately follows. Qexigator (talk) 18:17, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't object in principle, but it won't make a lot of sense to a new reader. Is there not some better way of phrasing it? "Ireland's southern counties" is completely wrong. As the next sentence but one tells us, it was for 26 out of 32 counties – Ireland's southern counties are Kerry, Cork, Waterford and Wexford.  Scolaire (talk) 23:27, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Better, but still not explaining the article well. The Act didn't just select 26 counties, or about five-sixths of the island, at random, it partitioned the country into Northern Ireland and "Southern Ireland". If it's to be phrased that way, it would be better to say "...for the establishment of a parliament and other institutions for the internal government of Ireland, minus the six counties of Northern Ireland", or some such.  Scolaire (talk) 23:56, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Remove 'polity'?

message: I'm reasonably open on this if we have references,   However  the phrase "Unionists feared that a nationalist government in Dublin would discriminate against Protestants and would impose tariffs that would unduly hit the north-eastern counties of the province of Ulster" obviously includes Rome Rule, bit it is less clear that it is confined to that.  Discrimination is not the same thing as subjugation to the rule of a Church.----Snowded TALK 15:09, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: You're not insisting on an academic reference this time? Gob Lofa (talk) 15:38, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm looking for an argument to justify the inclusion of that pipe link Gob Lofa.  If there is evidence that Rome Rule is the same 'set' as discrimination then the pipe link is OK.  Please try and use the talk page to present evidence/argument rather than to continue issues you have on other articles ----Snowded TALK 15:52, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I've no intention of forgetting your troublesome behaviour elsewhere every time you kick up a new fuss. I'm glad to see you're no longer attempting to convince other editors that they bear a heavier burden of proof than is actually the case; I find this encouraging. So try to keep your nose clean. Rome Rule was a unionist fear; I see neither a problem with the pipe, nor any excuse for your edit-warring on a topic demonstrably outside your comfort zone. Gob Lofa (talk) 16:29, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: No question that Rome Rule was a Unionist fear, but have you got some evidence (other than your own opinion) that all fears of discrimination are covered by it?  Its a pretty simply question.  A reference is all that is needed----Snowded TALK 16:35, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: You're no stranger to simple questions; you've refused to answer enough of them. Gob Lofa (talk) 16:40, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: So no reference to support your assertion and the proposed change? ----Snowded TALK 16:47, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: See previous comments. Gob Lofa (talk) 16:49, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: None of them contain a reference, one asserts your opinion.  Do I need to refer you to wikipedia policy on sourcing? ----Snowded TALK 16:54, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Take a look yourself, see what needs academic sources and what doesn't. Gob Lofa (talk) 16:59, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Anything challenged needs sourcing.  Academic is good but its not the only possibility ----Snowded TALK 17:03, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: See? It's not hard to change your ways. Gob Lofa (talk) 17:06, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Some context require academic references, some don't.  Now do you have any to support the assertion that Rome Rule is the same as discrimination in this case? ----Snowded TALK 17:09, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: You're coming along nicely. Now see previous comments. Gob Lofa (talk) 17:14, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

text: Well I can see a problem with saying increasing tariffs is part of a Rome Rule fear. Perhaps if the sentence was broken in two it would make a bit more sense. Dmcq (talk) 20:01, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree ----Snowded TALK 23:49, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Works for me. Gob Lofa (talk) 00:47, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Following this understanding I have created a second sentence "They also feared a nationalist government could discriminate against Protestants after gaining political power over their interests in Ireland." with the edit note "this was also a relevant factor why in the end they established a protestant state for a protestant people in the north." Osioni (talk) 19:18, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rome Rule 

message: Snowded, some admins may consider this article to come under the Troubles-related restrictions. You've reverted twice in less than 15 minutes. Gob Lofa (talk) 15:29, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  1RR violation 

message: Did it have any kind of flag? I've seen at least one article (History of Ireland (1801–1923)) linking to here that uses the Union Jack as its flag, which seems odd and quite likely wrong, as we don't get that for links to other parts of the UK, except occasionally Northern Ireland (probably incorrectly since NI has its own Red Hand of Ulster flag, which is used everywhere else in Wikipedia).Tlhslobus (talk) 21:49, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It had no real existence so no there was no special flag set up for it, the Irish Republic used the Irish tricolour and had effective control of most of the area. It was a creation of the parliament in Westminster so I think representing it with the Union Jack is probably best. The Ulster Banner was only made the official flag of Northern Ireland a few years after its creation. Dmcq (talk) 22:04, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

text: The Ulster Banner is no longer the official flag of Northern Ireland, it has no special official flag of its own. See Flag of Northern Ireland. Probably St Patrick's Saltire would be better now but I'm happy enough wih a small Ulster Banner just to show it as a distinct place. Dmcq (talk) 22:07, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flag?