Template talk:United Kingdom constituents and affiliations

message: These are not part of the UK- so should not be included here. There already is a template in use for them. Astrotrain 14:14, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there any specific reason as to why they are listed that way and not alphabetically? - TheKeith  15:51, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: While the British Crown dependencies are not part of the UK, the latter is responsible for their defense and international relations.  I also ordered the Crown dependencies last (after the overseas territories, bona fide constituents) because they are distinct from the UK yet affiliated with it.  The headings clearly indicate this.  E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 18:30, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

text: There is no need to list them on this template- in any case it looks a complete mess. Astrotrain 18:37, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree: even the UK government yearbook lists the overseas territories and treats Crown dependencies indicated in this template.  No reason to not do so here.  As for the "mess": it looks fine on my screen and in multiple resolutions (though I'll tweak the breaks), which is similar to many other political templates (e.g., Canada#See_also).  Lastly, the prior template was so minimal (and redundant with links in the second paragraph of the intro) that it was arguably without purpose.  E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 18:57, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I still think it looks a mess. Any way of changing the template, perhaps cutting out the territory flags (too small to see at that size). Astrotrain 19:03, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we can nix the flags ... that will reduce clutter. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 19:05, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I've nixed the flags for the overseas territories: we can also do so for the countries and Crown dependencies for consistency ... I think it looks fine. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 19:09, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Overseas territories and Crown dependencies

message: The use of flags is nesessary because people can recognise a country that way, like people for whom English isnt a first language.
Biofoundationsoflanguage, stop trying to trash wikipedia just because you can't get your own way. You have done it elsewhere & your being disruptive. Fennessy 15:27, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The flag icons add little to the encyclopaedia. If people are going to persist in removing a flag for POV grounds when it is no less of a flag than the other 3, we may as well have none of them. Biofoundationsoflanguage 17:56, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Mediation has closed.  I am going to be bold and remove all flags and the non-flag icon image for N.I.  The template looks fine without any flags.  Since they weren't previously used for the overseas territories or the crown dependencies, there is no logical reason why the constituent countries should be different.  Andrwsc 23:33, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Use of flags

message: can cover the information included in , so I suggest merging  into . --Wikipean (talk) 08:29, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger with {{tl|British dependencies}}