Diskusjon:Irland/Arkiv1

Offisielt navn

Ifølge Språkrådet er det kun «Irland» som er offisielt navn på Irland. Verken «Republikken Irland» eller «Den irske republikk» er noen offisielle navn. Foreslår å flytte artikkelen til Irland (som allerede er en omdirigering hit). Jon Harald Søby 2. des 2005 kl.11:26 (UTC)

I såfall er det mer som bør endres i samme slengen, så vent litt. --–Duffman 2. des 2005 kl.11:48 (UTC)

Når man velger artikkelnavn er det ikke kun hva som står øverst i artikkelen som teller. Man må også søke å unngå misforståelser ved opplisting i en kategori. Et alternativ er derfor å kalle artikkelen Irland (republikk), så den ikke forveksles med Irland (øy). --–Duffman 2. des 2005 kl.11:56 (UTC)

Jeg synes Duffmans poeng er godt, fordi det er vanskelig å skille mellom de forskjellige ting som menes med Irland. Republikken utgjør geografisk bare en del av øya, og historisk bare en liten del av irsk historie, og jeg synes det er praktisk å kunne skille ting fra hverandre på en ryddig måte. Et alternativ som ville være greit for meg er å omtale republikken som Éire (som på UDs sider er oppgitt som offisielt navn, og i slike tilfeller er vel UD en minst like viktig kilde som Språkrådet). Cnyborg 2. des 2005 kl.20:32 (UTC)

En ting til: Når det gjelder kategoriene mener jeg veldig sterkt at vi bør beholde tredelingen med Republikken, Nord-Irland og felleskategorien Irland; dersom det ender med at denne artikkelen flyttes ber jeg om at kategoriene blir stående, eller at man i det minste tar en separat diskusjon der. Cnyborg 2. des 2005 kl.20:38 (UTC)

Og en liten ting til – en eventuell flytting må ikke medføre at man erstatter alle tilfeller av republikken Irland med Irland; det er den normale måten å skille de to enhetene fra hverandre på, som brukes f.eks. i Caplex og Store Norske når man skriver om forhold etter 1922. Cnyborg 2. des 2005 kl.20:41 (UTC)

Jeg tror ikke navnebytte til Éire bidrar til å skille mellom republikken og øya – navnet brukes om begge, jfr. en:Éire. Slik jeg ser det har vi kun to reelle alternativer: beholde status quo eller omdøpe artikkelen og kategoriene til Irland (republikk). Jeg er helt enig med Chris i at det må skilles mellom de to begrepene i kategoriene. --–Duffman 2. des 2005 kl.23:01 (UTC)

Jag ändrade statens namn i inforutan till höger, eftersom landets namn enligt Irlands konstitution (Constitution of Ireland, §4) är "Éire" på iriska och "Ireland" på engelska. Såg att artikeln på nynorsk hade gjort på samma sätt.Soderfeldt 29. okt 2008 kl. 16:40 (CET)

Jepp, ser at du har rett - jeg skal tilbakestille min tilbakestilling og legge en presisering i teksten. Finn Rindahl 29. okt 2008 kl. 16:49 (CET)

Hm, litt komplisert dette - for Norge brukes «Kongeriket Norge» i tilsvarende infoboks, likeså for Sverige og Danmark. Det som gjør utslaget til at jeg likevel mener versjonen med bare Ireland/Eire bør bestå er at den irske grunnloven har en egen paragraf om landets navn §4. Finn Rindahl 29. okt 2008 kl. 17:05 (CET)

Jag tror du resonerar rätt. Jag tror inte Finland heller har en parargraf om landets namn, men det officiella namnet anges oftast vara "Suomen tasavalta" och "Republiken Finland". Men eftersom det för Irlands del är lagstadgat att namnet Éire/Irland är det officiella namnet, anser jag inte att det finns någon orsak att ange ett annat namn. Som en enkel regel skulle jag hålla: Om ett namn finns lagstadgat, skall det användas. Om det inte finns lagstadgat, skall det namn användas, som allmänt brukar användas. I detta fall då alltså Suomen tasavalta/Republiken Finland, Kongeriket Norge, Éire/Ireland. Soderfeldt 30. okt 2008 kl. 14:59 (CET)

Da er nok vi to enige (trass i en aldri så liten editwar her tidligere ...), bortsett fra at Republikken Finland, Kongeriket Norge, Forbundsrepublikken Tyskland etc. ikke er det navn som allment brukes. Det er jo Finland, Norge, Tyskland etc. «Kongeriket Norge» er vel mer «fullt navn»,«navn med tittel» eller noe slikt. Finn Rindahl 30. okt 2008 kl. 15:42 (CET)

WillieWonka 19. mar 2010 kl. 19:23 (CET)==Offisielt navn== "Constitution of Ireland" - "Article 4 - The name of the State is Éire, or, in the English language, Ireland.[1]; "WWW.DFA.IE": "Name of State The Irish Constitution provides that the name of the State is Éire or in the English language, Ireland. The Republic of Ireland Act of 1948 provides for the description of the State as the Republic of Ireland but this provision has not changed the use of ‘Ireland’ as the name of the State in the English language." [2]. WillieWonka 6. mar 2010 kl. 01:41 (CET)

If you want to discuss matters regarding this article, please keep it here on the discussion-page - NOT in the article. Thank you. Aldebaran 6. mar 2010 kl. 01:59 (CET)

I was trying to put in a source. It went in the wrong place. Its in now.

The sources speak for themselves so my point is the name of the state is "Ireland", not "Republic of Ireland" so this article should be located at "Irland".

The article is put at "Republic of Ireland" in English Wiki because because editors in the United Kingdom far out-number editors in Ireland. The UK editors do not like the name of the State because the name is also the name for the island of Ireland (which includes Northern Ireland). While that is a fair point - it is not relevant because, like it or not, the name is Ireland and even the British Government uses the term "Ireland" (not "Republic of Ireland"). But there is a lot of politics on Wikipedia and with 60 million British people, and only 4 million Irish people, British Wikipedians dominate the content of Irish articles on English Wikipedia. It is up to you if you want to move this article. I am pointing out the facts. All the best. WillieWonka 6. mar 2010 kl. 11:04 (CET)

Not really any point in adding a reference in the lead (which is something we try to avvoid at this project anyway), both the forms «Irland» and «Republikken Irland» (with English and Gaelic translations) are included already. Maybe we should consider adding a separate subsection about the name, but for now I'm removing that link from the intro (again). Please do not readd it without consensus at this page. Finn Rindahl 6. mar 2010 kl. 23:58 (CET)

WilliWonka does have a point regarding the official name. Judging from the earlier discussions here, I can assure Willie that the chosen article-title is not politically motivated. It was as far as I can tell, chosen to distinguish the state and the island. The article's infobox uses the names Willie are suggesting. We have an article about the Irish Republic which apparantly was called Poblacht na hÉireann in gaelic (is this maybe a source of confusion?). The foreign ministry of Norway also uses Irland / Éire / Ireland as the official names. Maybe we should consider moving the article and correcting the text? («Irland» is currently a redirect to «Republikken Irland», so moving it should not be too problematic - I think). Aldebaran 7. mar 2010 kl. 02:06 (CET)

Jeg er ikke uenig i flytting, men la oss vente en ukes tid og se om andre fremmer innvendinger - det har jo vært diskutert før uten at flytting ble resultatet. Jeg fjerner ellers ordet «offisielt» fra ingressen. Finn Rindahl 7. mar 2010 kl. 11:19 (CET)

Støttes. Vi har ikke hastverk. Aldebaran 7. mar 2010 kl. 14:15 (CET)

"I can assure Willie that the chosen article-title is not politically motivated.". Sorry, this is 100% due to politics. The United Kingdom had a policy for 70 years that it would not use the name "Ireland". The United Kingdom has no problem using the name "Mongolia" (even though Mongolia does not include the larger "Inner Mongolia") or "Samoa" (which does not include "American Samoa") or "Luxembourg" (which does not include the much larger "Luxembourg Province"). In my opinion you have intentionally or not blindly followed English wikipedia. English language Wikipedia is, not surprisingly, dominated by English speakers from the US and UK (the two largest English speaking countries). UK editors have their political bias because they grew up in a country that passed a law 60 years ago (the "Ireland Act") that deliberately pretended that the name of the Irish state was the "Republic of Ireland". Its up to you what you do here. The reality is that "Ireland" is the name of the State; there is no more room for confusion than there is in the case of Luxembourg or Mongolia; and the only real confusion is that obviously most readers do not look past the headline and so will conclude that the name of the Irish state is the "Republic of Ireland" (which ironically sounds more formal than "Ireland"). There is no realy arguments in favour of "Republic of Ireland" as a title. If, oddly, unlike say Luxembourg or the Solomoon Islands, you feel it is somehow confusing, you could call the article "Ireland (state)" or some such name. The ususal thing to do would simply be to give the state the name "Ireland" and give the Island the name "Island of Ireland" or some such but whatever you decide, "Republic of Ireland" is misleading and inserting a section about the name is silly when the answer to this is so simple: move the aritlce. All the best. WillieWonka 19. mar 2010 kl. 02:05 (CET)

By the way, even the United Kingdom Government now calls the Irish state "Ireland". See http://www.fco.gov.uk/resources/en/pdf/4103709/5476465/5550005/geographical-names.pdf

so this really is a bit 'off'. Its offensive to me of course because I am from Ireland and don't like the way Norwegian Wiki Editors have decided to effectively pretend my State has a name it does not have. WillieWonka 19. mar 2010 kl. 02:08 (CET)

I am a bit sensitive, maybe.....But I could tell you some stories about the tricks the United Kingdom used to play on us.....! This is all a legacy of that. WillieWonka 19. mar 2010 kl. 02:11 (CET)

Actually the editor who made the decision back in 2005 was a employee of the catholic church in Norway. Not normally a group that's biased towards the Protestant Irish... It's the same solution used when referring to China, the Republic of China and the Peoples Republic of China. So if we change this one, that one also have to change. Profoss 19. mar 2010 kl. 04:07 (CET)

You have funny 'political' ideas - what has religion to do with any of this? The first Fathers of Irish independence were all protestant: Wolf Tone; Robert Emmett; Charles Stewart Parnell etc; Our first President in 1937 was Protestant too. In contrast, the Roman Catholic Church strongly supported the Norman invasion of Ireland that brought British rule here originally....but we are getting off-topic and exploring your political views;

Back to the topic. The China comparison is totally incorrect. The official name of 'Mainland China' IS the People's Republic of China; the official name of 'Taiwan-China' IS the Republic of China. I would be very happy if you truly adopted the 'Chinese solution' (i.e. call the United Kingdom by its official name - which you do already; and call Ireland by its official name, 'Ireland', which extraordinarily, you do not do. Instead you are pretending its official name is the 'Republic of Ireland'.

PS, also why is the BURDEN on me to prove any of this? You have given no sources etc for why 'Republic of Ireland' should be used as the name. I have given concrete legal sources for why 'Ireland' should be the name. This is very odd and this is 100% political as I have said. WillieWonka 19. mar 2010 kl. 07:43 (CET)

Willie, you're arguing against someone who agrees with you... In the last posts from me and Aldebaran we agree to move the article, but also to wait a while to allow others to comment. No contra arguments present so far. Finn Rindahl 19. mar 2010 kl. 09:01 (CET)

Ok thanks for that clarification Mr Rindahl. Thanks also for tolerating my English here. Don't worry, I will not become a regular editor here. I appreciate I cannot speak Norwegian. I have a narrow objective here - just getting the article moved. But, could I suggest, that there is a broader lesson here for each of you Norwegian Wikipedians. I think the lesson is "Just because something is the way it is in the English version of Wiki does not mean (a) you should assume it is correct; or (b) do the same thing. Remember, Norwegians have their own outlooks on things and it does not have to be the same as that of the US or UK etc. It is a bit frightening how the prejudice of one country can infiltrate another through the Internet if we do not each think critically. All the best. WillieWonka 19. mar 2010 kl. 19:23 (CET)

Of course, it could be that you did not need me to point any of that out! WillieWonka 19. mar 2010 kl. 19:24 (CET)

I can assure you Wikipedia in Norwegain is trying hard *not* to just copy English Wikipedia, but thanks for reminding anyway :) Finn Rindahl 19. mar 2010 kl. 20:14 (CET)

Funny ideas eh? ahh, there is nothing as efficent as telling the opposite side that they've got 'funny ideas'. I kindly pointed out that the matter has been discussed by Norwegian editors before, and the editor that made the case for "Republikken Irland" was a historian employed by the Norwegian Catholic Church. Who was also very interested in Irish history (from a Republican point of view). Sadly he's no longer active, so he can't make a case for it himself. I still feel the China comparison is a good comparison. And btw, we don't call UK by it's proper name which would be "Forente Kongedømme" (FK) in Norwegian, instead we use Storbritannia (directly translates to 'Great Britan').

To put it all in laymans terms, I'm saying that you've expressed a rather strong POV in this particular case (and the fact that your user (or a person with the same username) is banned from the en.wiki does not strenghen your case). Yeah, i know the horror stories about what the poms did in Britain, but did you also know that there where Norwegians fighting with William at the Battle of the Boyne....)

I oppose the move on the grounds of your POV, and the fact that it's been up before (debated by no.wiki editors) and the consensus was against moving the article. Profoss 27. mar 2010 kl. 17:03 (CET)

Errr, siden ingen hadde tatt til motmæle flyttet jeg siden (mens du skrev dette innlegget mot flytting). Flytt gjerne tilbake, så åpner vi for ny diskusjon (men holder i såfall den diskusjonen på norsk...). mvh Finn Rindahl 27. mar 2010 kl. 17:11 (CET)

Haha, ikknoe problem, jeg har egentlig ikkenoe problem med flytting, jeg har større problemer med argumentasjonen for flytting. Selvom det er viktig, som Cnyborg skrev tidligere, å skille Øya Irland, Republikken Irland og den tidligere irske republikken. Det er mer et problem på kategorinivå Profoss 27. mar 2010 kl. 17:18 (CET)