Wikipedia:WikiProject Ireland Collaboration/Argument summaries

Poll on Ireland article names – Argument summaries

This page offers a wider range of argument summaries related to the Poll on Ireland article names. The poll itself offers some basic, neutral arguments in favour and against the options being polled. There are many more arguments —some less neutral— which have been put forward for or against one configuration of article names or another. The list here is almost certainly not exhaustive. '

During the Collaboration Project's work, a number of participants (listed below, but not necessarily only those editors were involved) put together the following list putting forward various arguments and counter-arguments. "Summaries" were originally added to each for/against pair but these have been edited out as not all of them were balanced (in terms of neutrality and POV).

Participants who helped to put this page together:

SarekOfVulcan (talk)
rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid (coṁrá)
MITH
Bastun^{BaStun not BaTsun}
Tfz
Sarah777 (talk)
HighKing (talk) 22:16, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Argument: The state article should be located at Ireland because Ireland is the state's common name.

Counter argument: Not all articles on states are located at their common name (e.g. China)

Argument: The state article should be located at Ireland because that is the state's official name.

Counter argument: (1) Most articles on states on Wikipedia do not appear at the official name of the state (e.g. France vs. French Republic); (2) The state's official name is ambiguous as it is also the name of Ireland, the island.

Argument: The state article should be located at Ireland (state) because the Irish Constitution refers to it as a State.

Counter argument: Some people think that a state is a subset of a country.

Argument: The state article should be located at Ireland (country) because country is the common word for a sovereign state.

Counter argument: Ireland-the-island is also commonly called a country, there may be confusion between the two.

Argument: The island article should be located at Ireland because the island named Ireland goes back much further than the state.

Counter argument: Using Ireland for the island prevents the current state from having an article under its Constitutionally-defined name and common name.

Argument: The current Ireland article should be located at Ireland because it is the primary topic. It is about more than just the island in a geographic sense.

Counter argument: Expanding a geographic article more to include non geographic information leans towards satisfying a certain POV as there is no identifiable obvious primary topic.

Argument: The article on the state must be moved from Republic of Ireland because Republic of Ireland is not the official name or most common name of the state of the state.

Counter argument: (1) Nearly all articles on states on Wikipedia are located at a title that is not the official name of the state (e.g. Germany not Federal Republic of Germany, Australia not Commonwealth of Australia). (2) There is no such obligation to move any one of these articles just because it is at the title that is not the name of the state. (3) The article cannot be moved to Ireland, because that is the name of the island, and Republic of Ireland is the official description and a commonly-used alternative name.

Argument: The title should be away from Republic of Ireland, because while use of the term Republic of Ireland could be declared as relatively common, its use is erroneous and is mostly done by the British media who have not changed their practices since the Belfast Agreement.^{this argument needs to be rephrased to avoid "negative arguments"}

Counter argument: The phrase is used by books, academic journals and TV, radio and press in the Republic of Ireland, the UK and worldwide. There is nothing unusual about the of either Republic of Ireland or Ireland to refer to the state by the British press. Neither is it "erroneous" - it is not erroneous to call France France instead of the French Republic. The Belfast Agreement was a wide ranging agreement between two states: neither Wikipedia nor the press is bound by it.

Argument: While the term Republic of Ireland was invented by the Irish Government, the Irish Taoiseach who passed it, John Costello made it clear it was not to be used as a name (here or here). Use of the term only spread as the British government refused to recognise the constitutional name of the country making ROI more common in the UK until 1998.

Counter argument: Republic of Ireland is commonly used by books, academic journals, TV, radio and print media in the Republic of Ireland, the UK and worldwide. It is not certain how Costello intend it to be used, but, whatever his intentions, it has widespread use as name for the state today.

Argument: The title Republic of Ireland may suggest to a reader that it is the name of the country, as every other country article either uses either an official name or the most common short form name; of which Republic of Ireland is neither.

Counter argument: Republic of Ireland is a common name for the country in question. Whether it is shorter or longer than the official name is of no consequence. The opening line of the lede and/or a hatnote can explain to the reader that the "official name" is Ireland. ^{Doesn't really argue the point that ROI is not a name, nor the most common one even if it is deemed as one regardless of the facts.}

Argument: The title should remain at Republic of Ireland because it is commonly used by government, media and the populace whenever necessary to disambiguate between the state and the island, and the island article is already at Ireland.

Counter argument: Republic of Ireland is not the state's name nor is it the most common name, nor is it commonly used by government media and populace when disambiguation is not necessary. Also the location of the island article (currently at Ireland) is also subject to change under this process.

Argument: Wikipedia is supposed to educate and enlighten readers, and not confuse. A pretence by Wikipedia that 'Republic of Ireland' is the name of the state has no educational value whatsoever.

Counter argument: Some editors claim that readers might not be able to understand the complexity of one of two states on an island assuming the name of the entire island.

Argument: The state article should be located at Ireland because the state owns 85% of the island.

Counter argument: The state does not control or claim 100% of the land surface of the island. The remaining 15% is Northern Ireland.

Argument: There is clearly a need to disambiguate between the island and the state, and use of the real-world name of the island and the real-world official description of the state allows us to do so without use of artifical disambiguators such as [Article (state)], [Article (island)], [Article (country)], etc.

Counter argument: It is better to change to our own article names by consensus or an agreed process.

Argument: The current name is unacceptable as it is a political imposition; it is neither the common name nor a legal or official name (unlike PR China).

Counter argument: The current name is acceptable as it is an official description introduced in legislation by the Irish government.

Argument: The name should remain at Republic of Ireland because that's the official name as denoted by current UK legislation

Counter argument: The rest of the world as well as every international organization from the UN to NATO to the EU recognizes the country by the name it choses for itself - Ireland.