Talk:Republic of Ireland–United Kingdom border

message: When setting up some redirects to the new page name (see above), I discovered that an article called Irish border already exists. I've put the tags on both articles to suggest that Irish border be merged into here (Republic of Ireland-United Kingdom border). If there are no objections this can be done in about a week. Thryduulf 12:51, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a precedent to use the name of the two states in the title, eg Canada-United States border.   The term "Irish border" is non-specific and to an outsider does not obviously refer to the international frontier.   JAJ 14:56, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Now done.   JAJ 02:17, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: In an article of this nature, using the term of "Ireland" instead of the "Republic of Ireland" is confusing and not NPOV.  JAJ 18:07, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Confusing, perhaps, but certainly not failing NPOV. The name of the state in the south of Ireland is unambiguously and without qualification "Ireland". The "Republic of Ireland" is simply a descriptive term. --Breadandcheese 07:46, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As per the Belfast Agreement, each jurisdiction has agreed to use the terms "Ireland" and "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland".  These are the names of the states in international law and these are what we should use. --Red King (talk) 13:09, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of the term "Ireland" for "Republic of Ireland" 

message: There are no inline citations in this article. --Mal 12:06, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Citations

message: the section on crossing the border is not written clearly. is a passport or id required to cross from the republic to the uk or not? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.139.60.32 (talk) 17:37, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A passport is not required (as long as one is an Irish or UK citizen) ID isint required either although it may be advisable to have some anyway to avoid any inconvenience for the (nowadays fairly rare) occasions when one might be stopped and questioned. Personally Ive crossed the border hundreds of times (Nowadays its very rare to even see Police or army at the border) and only been asked for ID twice -Once in NI and once in the Republic. On both occasions I wasnt actually AT the border but maybe 4 or 5 miles from it. Most times they just wave you through. There was a clampdown a few years back by the Irish immigration authorities where busses were quite frequently boarded and ID demanded from individuals of Non Northwest-European appearance however the bad publicity which resulted forced them into taking a less blatently racist approach. (one black guy they stopped turned out not only to be an Irish citizen but actually told off the officer in Gaelic) 80.229.222.48 10:15, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  So this blows away the "In recent times (since the early 90s) such controls have not been in operation on the border." line in the main article, then?  The last time I saw the patrols was about mid-2005, but then I normally take the 8:00 Belfast-Dublin train.  But I understand the Garda still maintains an Immigration unit out of Dundalk Garda station?  The patrols tend to be on the N1 on a layby south of the Ravensdale Inn, or they would do a walkthrough of the train at Dundalk station.  Even when the patrols were on the N1, I've never been stopped while driving, only when they did a walkthrough on a bus.  And I'm not of Non Northwest-European appearance, but a driver's licence with a Belfast address helps, I suppose. -Kain 01:23, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  crossing the border 

message: As well as the towns, farms (Including that of the infamous Slab Murphy) and even petrol stations bisected by the border there have been anecdotal stories (can anyone confirm them or provide citations) of the border passing through peoples houses and how they can choose which side they get their water, electricity, landline telephone etc from.
Would such households need to pay domestic rates for the "Northern" part of their property and how would television licencing work (move the TV into the kitchen when the inspector knocks on the door ??). Which country would they be "resident" in for taxation and electoral purposes ? 80.229.222.48 10:40, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There are lots of buildings bisected by the Belgian-Dutch []. The practice there is that all buildings fall under the jurisdiction of whatever country their front door is in. Perhaps there is a similar arrangement in Ireland ? 2.221.93.93 (talk) 21:01, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Houses bisected by the border 

message: On 7 December 1922, Stormont resolves to make its address to leave Irish Free State; 13 December, PM Craig confirms King had received and responded to address (but what day did the King receive the address? - That is the relevant date). The Governor of Northern Ireland's office was established by Letters Patent on 9 December 1922. Possibly this is the relevant date as it might be unlikely that the office would have been established if the King had not received the Stormont address on or before then. Some one might know or find out the answer? 
The above repeats this User's entry on Partition of Ireland talk page. User Red King appeared to think that he had located a source. This user could not find anything re 13 December date on that link. If there is a statement to that effect, perhaps user Red King could set it out here on this talk page. This would be appreciated. In the mean time I have deleted reference to 13 December date in the absence of certainty.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Redking7 (talk • contribs) 20:56, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I suspect that, according to the (unwritten!) constitution of the UK, the moment of partition happened when the King gave Royal Assent to the request from Northern Ireland and not before.  I should think it very likely that Craig would have announced it immediately he got it.  But I accept that the source is not clear and consequently can't be used as a citation for a specific date. [also a repeat of reply at Partition of Ireland] --Red King (talk) 21:38, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Date NI left Free State?:

message: :Note:Post refers to this picture
I propose removing the image identifying itself as being of Swalinbar (it isn't) Co. Cavan (it's taken 6km into Fermanagh) and whose filename suggests that it's on the border (it isn't). It seems of questionable relevance to the article. I can substitute an image of mine of the border at Pettigo, Counties Donegal/Fermanagh. --Mackerski (talk) 18:34, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed 213.40.106.183 (talk) 19:42, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Someone has marked it do not delete but until they can provide justification for it It should be removed 213.40.110.233 (talk) 19:21, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a picture of the border taken on one side looking across. It is a relevant as you can get. Sarah777 (talk) 21:28, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Even if the border is in the picture there is nothing to indicate where it is (all road markings and signs are UK style and in any case as one contributer has already pointed out and verified by Google maps and geograph.org.uk it is at least 6Km from the border) It isint even in Swalinbar (signpost in picture indicates its 5.5 miles from Swalinbar) It is no more a picture of the border than one taken in the centre of Newry or L'Derry. 213.40.112.15 (talk) 22:37, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Incorrect. The photo was taken in the South. The "Yield" sign is an Irish sign; in the North it reads "Give way". The road markings at the junction also clearly indicate that the road in the photo terminates at the border. Sarah777 (talk) 23:18, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: OK. actually you are right and I have erred slightly. The sign says "Give Way". I hope you have found this exchange instructive and will be more careful the next time. And the road markings at the junction also clearly indicate that the road in the photo is in NI. Sarah777 (talk) 23:24, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hereis a picture of the actual border taken at Beleek on the N3/A46 from Co. Donegal looking into County Fermanagh. (Im not sure how the establishment on the left can claim to be in Co Donegal though -unless the border bends parallel with the left hand side of the road for a few metres which is possible) However there may be copyright issues with using this picture in the article ????? 213.40.104.250 (talk) 20:30, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Most border crossings are now viewable on google streetview. 86.112.87.9 (talk) 11:53, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photographs 

message: The title of this article was changed in April (see #Title), but clearly those who did so have not much grasp of international diplomatic protocol (or indeed the Belfast Agreement).  The names of the states concerned are "Ireland" and "The United Kingdom" (of Great Britain and Northern Ireland).  [There is no such state as 'the Republic of Ireland' - "Republic" is just the description of its constitutional status.]  So I propose that the article be moved again - to "Ireland - United Kingdom border".  (The opening paragraph should begin with the long form title of the UK).  --Red King (talk) 23:36, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The opening paragraph would then read 
**The Ireland - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland Border also referred to as The Irish border, or (in the island of Ireland) as The Border, is the international boundary between the north-east part of the island of Ireland, Northern Ireland, which is part of the United Kingdom, and the rest of the island that forms the state of Ireland. 
--Red King (talk) 23:36, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

text: For an explanatory background, see Names of the Irish State#Name dispute with the UK, especially "Resolution". --Red King (talk) 23:36, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I prefer the current title; as the alternative is too long & cumbersome. GoodDay (talk) 23:43, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately the current title is wrong.  Wikipedia should reflect what is, not what we would like it to be. --Red King (talk) 23:44, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

text: The alternative is too cumbersome. Besides it's best to try and get Republic of Ireland changed before doing this (a change that's been rejected repeatly). GoodDay (talk) 23:48, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I support this proposal. I believe we should reflect real-world practice here. --Jza84 |  Talk   23:56, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

text: I not overly fussy; whatever ya'll think is best. GoodDay (talk) 00:00, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well of course you are perfectly free to write some text on the sea boundary.  I'm sure you can find the map showing the territorial waters boundary.  There is one at Rockall that would do at a pinch. --Red King (talk) 20:08, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Or we could just rename the article to precisely what it describes currently, the land border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. MickMacNee (talk) 20:16, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

text: It's an international border, though (thus UK is required). GoodDay (talk) 00:17, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Like I said, when forced to look at this in a 100% correct way by proposals of this sort, the length of the UK-Ireland international border is actually longer than the subject presented in this article, which is realy only about a land border between ROI/NI. MickMacNee (talk) 00:33, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

text: Cool. GoodDay (talk) 00:37, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I support the name change suggested for the article (Ireland - United Kingdom border). It is more correct and shorter. Regards. Redking7 (talk) 19:44, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

text: The border is not entirely contained in the island: it is just that the present article does not describe the sea border.  In either case, would you please explain what it has got to do with the name of the article.  --Red King (talk) 22:33, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: We should be assuming our readers don't know anything... and if they don't, don't you think they might find the article confusing? -MichiganCharms (talk) 04:56, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Re "We should be assuming our readers don't know anything": If that is the idea, then it seems to me that the name change is an even better idea. Otherwise "ignorant" readers might be misled concerning the names of the bordering states: Ireland and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Re the discussion of the marine border: that doesn't relate to the name of the article. The territorial waters are the respective territorial waters of the two states....so the names of the states are the appropriate reference point....Not sure what you have in mind on that. I would say if some one wanted to research the point to expand it to cover the border between Ireland and the UK at sea, that would be a welcome addition to the article. If you have time it would be a valuable contribution. Regards. Redking7 (talk) 17:34, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: We don't rename articles based on what might be added to them in the future. As the discussion about the maritime border demonstrates, there is no grounds to rename this article based on reader confusion over what border is being referred to, the article is quite clearly about the land border between the two places. And on wikipedia, when referred to in the context of and separate to the subject of Ireland the island itself, those two places are called Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. So we are back to the original reason, the dimplomatic recognition of the name of Ireland on wikipedia articles, and why you won't take that issue up at the appropriate article, Republic of Ireland, rather than pushing for the renaming of fringe articles into overlong but diplomatically correct names. MickMacNee (talk) 18:39, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The reality is that Northern Ireland is not a state and "The Republic of Irealand" is not the name of a state, merely a description of its constitutional arrangements [that it is not a monarchy].  This  article is about an international border should name the states on either side of it, using the names that are internationally recognised.  To do otherwise offends WP:OR at least, probably WP:NPOV.  --Red King (talk) 22:45, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: A nice idea. Perhaps you can start the policy that lays out precisely that not including the official state names in a wikipedia article about a border between two states constitutes original research. Because I for one have never seen it before, because I doubt its even needed. Wikipedia is not the UN, frankly, if the current title makes sense and is not confusing, I don't think anyone realy cares except yourself. Some people I guess can just 'blue sky' it, and see it for what it is, a proposal that is not designed to improve the atticle or the understanding for the reader. MickMacNee (talk) 23:13, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

text: Ok MickMacNee, I suppose now the reason you are opposed to the renaming is clear: it has nothing to do with marine borders (!) and everything to do with the name of the Irish state which you don't like. Too much POV is held on that one so intellecutal reasoning won't advance that discussion unfortunately - even though you say you don't think anyone cares (when clearly we all do!). Well, I support the change. You don't and that's not going to change. I guess it's a case of no more reasoning but just seeing what the broadest conensus decides on. Regards. Redking7 (talk) 19:25, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree; Ireland-United Kingdom Border is the correct solution. Sarah777 (talk) 22:45, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title again 

message: Re. this closure, on a technicality, the page was originally at Republic of Ireland-United Kingdom border before it was moved to Ireland-UK border and quickly moved to Republic of Ireland-UK border. The above RM was then opened to justify the initial move, but the second move was not as the above RM described, a revert, but a second move. So are we staying at 'UK' or moving back to the original 'United Kingdom'?. It needs to be seen to be believed that right now, the article title is Republic of Ireland-UK border, and the article lead is The Ireland – United Kingdom border. Crazy. MickMacNee (talk) 02:14, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Since there was no consensus for the original move, the article should revert to the last stable name. I'll move it back now. Parsecboy (talk) 02:49, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Note

message: Recently, Sinn Féin have called for there to be an 'all-island' telecommunications network, especially regarding mobile phones.
:Is this really worthy of inclusion in the article ? Opposition to the existance of the border is more or less Sinn Fein's principal raison d'etre so stating that they advocate 'all-island' telecommunications network (or 'all-island' anything else for that matter) is pretty much stating the blindingly obvious is it not ? In any case the fact that the O2 mobile network have been offering an "all Ireland" tarriff for quite some time now surely much renders the point pretty much moot ! 213.40.112.15 (talk) 14:48, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see any reason to keep that in the article. --Blowdart | talk 16:58, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thats an item for the articles Ireland, Northern Ireland and Republic of Ireland ~ R.T.G 21:55, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: The politics of mobile phone signals

message: Who is kidding yourself? In Ireland (anywhere on the island) it is refered to as "The Border" and certainly not the "Irish border". The border is not referred to as the "Irish" border outside of Ireland? If all people and places of Ireland, north and south, are refered to as Irish by outsiders, it doesn't take much to guess the average name of the border... Consider any English speaking country of the world (outside Ireland (island)), the border appears on the news... what did they call it? Some may refer to people as "from" Northern Ireland and, between Britain and Ireland (islands), the occasional news will say "Northern Irish" but in general and always on the border the name is known. This is it. ~ R.T.G 21:39, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Inner German border ~ R.T.G 21:45, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Korean border ~ R.T.G 21:48, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

text: Irish Sea ~ R.T.G 21:51, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "as the Irish Border (in Ireland)" 

message: I don't think "border" needed to be capitalized in this article. I therefore standardized on lower case throughout. --John (talk) 01:52, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Absolutely right. Mooretwin (talk) 08:49, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hear, hear. It is a common noun, not a proper one. 174.16.18.77 (talk) 16:38, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitalization 

message: Hmm. Why would anyone prefer the other version? Still, let's discuss it here and see if we can sort it out. --John (talk) 22:48, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm also confused by how I could "violate something" by making a simple revert. A good faith edit does not equal a good edit. Your edit removed a lot of good information which was more accurate than your "simplifying edit". What's strange is that you almost seem to take offense at being reverted, labeling my edit strange. Why would anyone prefer your edit is the real question here;the burden is on you to justify the change.MITH 23:11, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The content issue seems to be your preference for "the north-east part of the island of Ireland" rather than my preference "Northern Ireland". I prefer my version because it is shorter, carries the same info, and links to an article. Perhaps you could now justify why you prefer the more convoluted wording? If you wish to upgrade your knowledge of wikiquette, here would be the place to start. Reverting is only supposed to be used on vandalism, hence my slightly peevish tone. Best wishes, --John (talk) 00:05, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe you should read WP:BRD. Reverting is a perfectly acceptable practice, even if the help page you quote says otherwise. If it weren't how would things such as WP:CONSENSUS ever come into play? I reverted in order to keep the article in a more NPOV. It is an international border between two countries called the United Kingdom and Ireland not between two called Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.MITH 00:12, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe I have read WP:BRD. You aren't discussing very well though. My version had "...between Northern Ireland (which is part of the United Kingdom), and the rest of the island, which forms the Republic of Ireland." which seems to describe the situation very well indeed and in fewer words. What is your objection to shortening the text and keeping the meaning the same? And, re "Your edit removed a lot of good information"; which information did it remove exactly? --John (talk) 00:25, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: (ec)The name of the latter country in question is not the Republic of Ireland for one matter. Either way it's less NPOV. You're switching the primary topic. It's not a border with Northern Ireland its a border between Ireland and the United Kingdom. The previous version had that, yours doesn't.MITH 00:33, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you see where my version had "Northern Ireland (which is part of the United Kingdom)"? --John (talk) 00:38, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you see where I said saying "an international border between Northern Ireland and"....is not NPOV?MITH 00:43, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I tried making a compromise edit. If you're not happy with it, revert and we can discuss again here, otherwise this is going in circles.MITH 00:53, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Doesn't seem to be consensus for this change. RashersTierney (talk) 00:56, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Mine or John's? Mine was a compromise edit - you can revert if you want.MITH 00:59, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

text: My ref. was to original change by User John. If the compromise proposed by you is thought reasonable all round, fine by me. RashersTierney (talk) 01:03, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

text: Now that you know what I and others think the issues are, feel free to propose a new text here on the talk page.MITH 10:20, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I will. I only see you and one other (singular) in the discussion so far, and it would be great to have wider input. Re "The name of the latter country in question is not the Republic of Ireland"; if that is not its name why is the article at this title? --John (talk) 19:39, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a very long story - one currently been sorted out by Arbcom. There is a certain POV that use of the country's official name of Ireland is incorrect, although it looks like the Arbcom process will result in all titles with ROI being changed to Ireland (state). Read Names of the Irish state for further info.MITH 19:47, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Dear oh dear. It reminds me of the nonsense we have had to endure regarding the naming dispute over Macedonia. People with strong national ties and views should stay away from certain articles. I mean, how silly would it be if this article was called Ireland – United Kingdom border or even Ireland – Northern Ireland border?! WP:COMMONNAMES quite sensibly implies we use Ireland to refer to the country in most cases, but Republic of Ireland in cases (like this one) where ambiguity might result. --John (talk) 20:02, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly, John. Mooretwin (talk) 23:23, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe you're just smarter than the rest of us, I don't find it in the least bit silly. purple (talk) 10:56, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strange revert 

message: Are there any beaches on the "Northern" side of Lough Foyle/Carlingford lough and if so if one is walking along the beach when the tide is out and they go beyond the high water mark have they just entered another country ? 213.40.117.87 (talk) 11:11, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed you have and you are likely to be snatched and rendered by Republican frogmen. My advice? Don't do it. Sarah777 (talk) 16:43, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  It would actually be at the low water mark (Teritorial seas are measured from the low water mark wheras land ownership starts at the high water mark) so one would have to be in the water 213.40.109.40 (talk) 14:52, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maritime border 

message: A number of roads transverse the border multiple  times. The N54 (or A3) being an interesting case because a section of it is in the Republic but appears to be inaccessable from all but a few square kilometres of the Republic without passing through Northern Ireland. How is this section of road (and the area around it) policed ? Are the Garda Síochána allowed to pass through Northern Ireland in order to police it ? What is the situation in relation to other officials from the Irish Government or public utilities. Do water mains, telephone and electric lines all cross the border here too ? 213.40.117.87 (talk) 16:57, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Unmarked Garda vehicles can cross the border but while in NI cant use flashing lights/sirens and must observe the UK highway code (including speed limits). Officers cant carry firearms and have no more powers of stop/arrest than any member of the public. While in theory they could still peform a Citizen's arrest within NI they couldnt take a suspect back over the border but would have to hand them over to the NI authorities. There have been proposals to give both police forces powers to pursue suspects a certain distance across the border but to date nothing has come of this. 178.167.216.84 (talk) 20:43, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: N54 road "enclave" (Drummully Polyp) 

message: What were "Concession roads" and "Unapproved roads" and before the European Single market were all customs posts on border crossings closed to vehicular traffic at night ? 213.40.117.87 (talk) 16:57, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I can gather "Approved Roads" had permanent customs posts were the only places one could legally cross the border if one had goods to declare. "Unapproved roads" (insofar as they were open at all) were subject to random checks and were only intended for local traffic not carrying goods of such nature/quantity/value which would one would have been required to declare and "concession roads" were transit routes for traffic between two points in one jurisdiction passing through (but not stopping) in the other e.g. the portion of the road between Dundalk and Castleblaney which passed through Northern Ireland was a concession route.    In 1973 there were 20 approved roads and 17 concession routes out of a total 224 crossings. 86.129.213.73 (talk) 23:03, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Customs (historic practices and terminology)

message: This section and it's subsection appear not to have been updated since circa 2008/2009. Thryduulf (talk) 00:56, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Done February/March 2012. --Red King (talk) 20:29, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Customs and identity checks 

message: I see no sign that User:The Evil IP address made even a toke gesture toward a consultation before changing the mape of this article. In British and Irish typography, the convention is to use space ndash space (see template:ndash). The US convention is to use and unspaced mdash (see template:mdash). This article is not named in the same style as 'Franco-German border', where an unspaced hyphen is certainly correct. But it doesn't apply here.
This change should not have been made without dicussion and in my view should not have been made at all. --Red King (talk) 19:04, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  name of this article: 'space dash space' or just dash? 

message: Both the UK and Ireland entered the EEC in 1973 but the this article claims (without citation) that some customs controls remained in place until the Treaty of Maastricht that established the Internal Market. However, the EEC article says "Progress on the customs union proceeded much faster than the twelve years planned", so we still need a citation for its practical implementation between the UK and Ireland. 
Also, we needed to distinguish between customs controls and security controls, which I've done.--Red King (talk) 20:42, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The treaty of  Maastricht had nothing to do with it ! It was the Single European Act which effectively abolished (most) customs controls between NI, the Republic (and every other  EC/EU state for that matter). 2.221.93.93 (talk) 21:01, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks like the treaty abolish some borders: «Le traité crée un marché intérieur caractérisé par l'abolition, entre les États membres, des obstacles à la libre circulation des marchandises, des personnes, des services et des capitaux (ajout des marchandises, qui n'apparaissait pas sur le traité de 1957). Le traité de Maastricht ajoute aussi des mesures relatives à l'entrée et à la circulation des personnes dans le marché intérieur conformément à l'article 100 C. Le traité étend la politique commune à la pêche, alors que seule l'agriculture faisait l'objet du traité de 1957. »  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.67.188.213 (talk) 00:49, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  The EEC v the Single Market 

message: Is it still true to say "Although, unlike many other EU borders, there are no sign posts at crossing points notifying travellers that they are entering a different jurisdiction." There is now a sign while travelling north on the Irish M1 (N1) "Welcome to Northern Ireland", a different jusidiction. Stanstaple (talk) 18:40, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: As discussed elsewhere the signs you refer to were introduced in recent years but to date are only on a handful of border crossings and some of them have been removed/defaced/vandalized. 2.221.93.93 (talk) 21:01, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Welcome to Northern Ireland 

message: "only in the highlands of the Cavan-Fermanagh section could the border be said to accord with any significant physical impediments to movement."
What about Lough Foyle?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.58.92.249 (talk) 14:25, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Physical impediments 

message: Section says:
:During the Troubles in Northern Ireland, there were British military checkpoints on main border crossings and UK security forces made the remaining crossings impassable. By about 2005, in phase with implementation of the 1998 Good Friday Agreement, remaining controls were definitively removed. 
Could that please be explained a little more?  I.e. was it a Berlin Wall type of situation with defectors trying to escape across the border and all that?  If yes, was it mostly in just one direction; and if so, which?  Yes we in the USA really are this clueless about this stuff.  I'm hearing about it now mostly because of Brexit.  Thanks. 173.228.123.166 (talk) 02:56, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi. It wasn't the Berlin wall. People crossing the border weren't "trying to escape". They were trying to go to work. Or to visit family. Or church. Or to get groceries. Or to football training. Or otherwise just getting from A to B. Normal day-to-day stuff. Not 'The Spy Who Came in from the Cold'. Or some East Berlin spy movie. Just normal life. On smaller country roads the barriers that prevented them from getting to their grandmother's house were immovable blockades. Where bridges and roads were dismantled and replaced with concrete-filled casements. A manufactured dead-end. Compare the "then and now" photos of the Lacken Bridge road here for example. On larger roads (the official crossings), the checkpoints weren't immovable barriers. But gated checkpoints like this. Where you might just get waved through (at best), stopped and asked questions through the car window (if not), stopped and the car searched (sometimes), or shot dead if those manning the checkpoint were tired, in fear of attack or perhaps had wet fingers from the rain. The northern side of the border were manned by UK customs, RUC and the British Army. The southern side of these crossings weren't typically policed to any great extent. Irish Customs might wave larger trucks and vans into a lay-by before they reached the border proper. This is all covered in the Republic_of_Ireland–United_Kingdom_border#The_Troubles section. Guliolopez (talk) 12:51, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

text: Thanks.  That last linked section (the Troubles section) paints a clearer picture.  173.228.123.166 (talk) 04:58, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Military checkpoints 

message: At Republic of Ireland–United Kingdom border#Distinctive physical characteristics and Republic of Ireland–United Kingdom border#Waters around Northern Ireland we have the same text of . As the latter section notes , so is there any objection to the removal of the duplicate quote (and any associated text) from the latter section? FDW777 (talk) 21:57, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. FDW777 (talk) 16:12, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duplicate quote 

message: please remove the top flag on this map. 2603:8000:C100:5B30:A55D:A942:7266:577F (talk) 23:24, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  please remove the top flag on this map.