Template talk:United Kingdom constituents and affiliations

This template is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles

Politics

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles

Former discussion

When viewing the Scotland article, this template shows the regions of England. Was this intended? Ian Cairns 17:37, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Wales, and the regions of England, are the first level of government below HMG that exist (or may do so in the future, IYSWIM) in the UK, so, yes, I imagine so.

James F. (talk) 02:19, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Wales, Scotland and NI are more appropriately equivalent to England culturally though. Putting them on the same level as the regions of England is inaccurate; e.g. maps of the UK almost invariably mark the country borders but rarely the English regions. Even in terms of government they are vastly different.

Anyway, we should consider what someone browsing the Wales or Scotland article would be likely to be interested in. Someone wanting to get information on the UK might then read specific articles on its major constituent countries, but they are unlikely to want to jump from, say, Wales, to Greater London. I think regions of England should be a separate template. Rls 14:03, 2004 Sep 14 (UTC)

The "England" to which you refer doesn't have a single culture, and does not exist as a legal entity (and hasn't done since 1536). It is exceedingly odd to have it.

James F. (talk) 14:05, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

No country has a single culture, but England is a cultural entity to a large degree comparable with Wales, Scotland & NI. For example, England_football_team. As a legal entity, it exists in a negative form, being the part of the UK that isn't Scotland, Wales, or NI. And, I submit that someone reading Wales or Scotland would be more likely to want to read England than e.g. South West England. Most of the "region" articles are little more than stubs anyway. Rls 14:47, 2004 Sep 14 (UTC)

I would disagree both that if you're interested in an area of 3 million people, you will be interested in one of 52 million, and that we should not link to articles because they are stubs - indeed, it should spur us onwards to expand them.

James F. (talk) 06:46, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

How can the article be expanded any more though? It's an administrative area, with practically no cultural identity. It currently has just over 100 references (mostly geographic and political), whilst, as of the last cache of most referenced pages, Wales (184th) had 1,600 and Scotland (74th) had 3,300. For comparison, England (14th) had 10,500 (though a fair number of these are probably meant to point to UK (19th), which has about 8,000). Clearly they are not comparable. No one has ever been at war with the West Midlands for example, though England, Scotland, and Wales have many times. Rls 11:45, 2004 Sep 15 (UTC)

But that's about the historical context of the areas; the use of this template, however, is about the modern entities, which are rather different (except, perhaps, in the case of Scotland - certainly, modern Wales and the ancient Wales have little to do with one another, IYSWIM).

James F. (talk) 12:33, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

They are even less comparable to the modern English regions. Rls 13:12, 2004 Sep 15 (UTC)

For those who want it, there is now Template:United Kingdom regions which uses an old version of this template, and may be more suitable for English pages, if not Welsh/Scottish/Northern Irish ones. --Henrygb 00:40, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Overseas territories and Crown dependencies

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)[reply]

Is there any specific reason as to why they are listed that way and not alphabetically? - TheKeith

15:51, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

I think we can nix the flags ... that will reduce clutter. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 19:05, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

Ulster Banner

The Ulster Banner was never the flag of Northern Ireland it was the Banner of the former Parliament of Northern Ireland disbanded in 1972. Its use on these template is incorrect and POV.--padraig3uk 22:59, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect to discuss this issue here. You have caused enough dirupiton throughout many of these pages with NO CONSENSUS whatsoever on this. Please take your Republican agenda elsewhere Jonto 23:01, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please refain from Personal Attacks, removing POV dosen't require concencus, this flag was never the flag of Northern Ireland. Do you accuse everyone that dosen't agree with you with having a Republican agenda.--padraig3uk 23:05, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Again, you misunderstand the fact that in British contexts almost all flags have de facto rather than de jure status over the territiories they represent by default. Inserting your POV against the status quo that has been present for years does require consensus. I disagree with lots of people on lots of issues but it's obvious wih the complete zealotry and obstinance behind the edits attempting to remove symbols of Northern Irish identity and the repeated pro-Irish Republican comments that there is an agenda at play. This is the wrong place to discuss, so I will ignore your further comments here Jonto 23:16, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jonto, to the British government and under british law the flags of England, Scotland and Wales are recognised, but the only flag recognised for Northern Ireland is the Union Flag, so the Ulster banner has no status, its use by one section of the population of the north means it can't be called a de facto flag for the area, as it is rejected by a large minority of the population. I believe that Wikipedia should present fact, not the POV of any one side, I also hate revisionism in history. I see the widespread use of the Ulster banner in wikipedia as the promotion of POV, and whilst I have no problem with its use in it proper context as part of the history of Northern Ireland, its misuse on many templates that are not related to the period on 1921-72 or about Loyalism/Unionism is POV promoting.--padraig3uk 23:53, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Correctamundo! POV pushers, pushers pushers! out! out! out!--Vintagekits 23:57, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Again Padraig this is the wrong place to debate as this article uses the standard Northern Ireland template. All the issues have been discussed to death already. Under British law there is barely any legislation on any of the flags. It is your PoV that it should be removed, despite its widespread and still present usage.

Jonto 17:01, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PS VK - you know that the debate has hit rock bottom when things degenerate into chanting!

There is legisation that removed the Ulster Banner and the Government it belonged to in 1973, the British government dosent recognise the flag, therefore it shouldn't be used, simple fact, I find it suprising that those that proclaim that Northern Ireland is British are also those that refuse to accept British law on this issue.--padraig3uk 17:07, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong (and Incorrect place for debate). There was no legislation to remove the flag, just legislation to remove the NI local government. Please provide evidence of such legislation. May I also add that flags are not solely legal matters. Jonto 17:10, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The flag was granted to the Government of Northern Ireland as where it Arms, when the government was disbanded its flag ceased to exist in 1973 when the British government passed legislation to remove all powers from the Northern Ireland House of Commons.--padraig3uk 17:21, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think anyone 'proclaims' that Northern Ireland is British as its a simple fact that it is British, all six counties are as British as any other part of the UK. It is not a matter of 'Hear Say'. --Cka4004 18:09, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Ulster Banner is not the Flag of Northern Ireland and should not be used in this article.--Vintagekits 12:54, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am sick to death of this festering issue, and the piss-poor communication regarding it. Having ad-hoc discussions on each and every article or template is not the way to do it. Can somebody please create a centralised discussion and then post pointers to it on all effected pages. I really don't want to protect yet more pages due to this nonsense. Thanks/wangi 13:06, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Youi are not the only one. There was a centralised discussion on the Northern Ireland article page and the decision was made not to use the Ulster Banner. However there are two or three rogue editors that wish to have this "fight" ON EVERY PAGE. Its boring and embarrassing - the main offender is Astrotrain who now only edits every few days and that is to make a couple of reverts to stir this trouble up again.--Vintagekits 13:13, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you could post a summary of that discussion to a new section of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Northern Ireland (seems the best place) and then post pointers to that discussion on the talk pages of effected articles/ templates and any related articles, projects and users? This will allow for a further period of discussion, hopefully enforcing the consensus you report. This will then allow things to move forward! Thanks/wangi 13:27, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hear what you are saying wangi, however it would be pointless and not very good for my mental health. All the issues have been covered over and over again - like I say there are two or three (main Astrotrain) that will just ignore the consensus and are just happy to fuck around and get their satisfaction from causing "a bit of trouble". It actually really pisses my off and I am probably about to fuck wiki off altogether.--Vintagekits 13:32, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To prevent a silly edit war, and to avoid having a template with three flags, I've removed all the flags. If anyone can cite an encyclopedic reason to restore them, have a go. --John 20:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that Astrotrain is not listening John, he is continuing to edit war.--padraig 15:40, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Astrotrain seperating the Sovereign Base Area section is fair enough, I missed that part of the edit but I removed the flagcruft as per johns edit.--padraig 16:15, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop restoring flagicons they where removed by an admin to prevent edit warring.--padraig 16:23, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there has been a consensus on both the main N Ireland talk page, & the Template:United Kingdom regions talk page not to use the Ulster banner, despite claims to the contrary by one person(Jonto). As soon as August 23 comes I intend to remove the Ulster banner from this template, if anyone has an opposing view disuss it here(even though its been agreed upon twice elsewhere not to use this defunct and offensive flag). Fennessy 13:43, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is no consensus to remove anything from any pages. It is not defunct (as it is still in use), and it may well be offensive, but we don't censor Wikipedia. Astrotrain 13:32, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Astrotrain, the consensus was to remove the Ulster Banner from the infobox of the Northern Ireland article, all attempts to have it reinstated have failed, as it dosen't represent Northern Ireland today outside of some use in sports.--padraig 13:54, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quite frankly, this issue doesnt need a consensus. Thats like saying its OK to claim that Steven Spielberg is dead on his wikipedia article as long as you get a consensus on his talk page, even though everyone knows that hes in fact not dead. Not only would that not happen, people would get in serious legal trouble for saying it. The same should apply here. Fennessy 13:38, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What a bizarre statement to make? The issue is that some people wish to use the flag as it is a Northern Irish flag that represents Northern Ireland, and is used by international organisations, sport, local governemnt etc. Some people do not wish to use it as the British government don't use it and they find it offensive. So yes, consensus is needed. Astrotrain 13:46, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is that some editor are soapboxing on this issue to try and promote this banner as a flag of N Ireland when it has clearly been proven that it isn't. And consensus is not required to remove WP:POV that is WP:OR as you have failed to prove any status for this banner.--padraig 13:54, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus is required as these facts are disputed. Look at the problems your friend is having by falsely interpreting guidelines. Astrotrain 13:56, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are disputing the word of the British government and the Northern Ireland Assembly both of which rule over Northern Ireland and make its laws, so your claims is WP:OR.--padraig

International organisations? Name me one legitimate one outside of sports. No government uses or recognises this flag. Fennessy 13:57, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, you want to talk about guidelines? You have been blocked 4 times as far as I can make out, you can hardly claim to know them or abide by them Astrotrain. Fennessy 14:01, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Make that about 8 times since february.--padraig 14:15, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Use of flags

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

If the Ulster banner is just as valid as all the other flags in use, then its strange that Scotland has no legislation that expressly forbids the use of the St Andrew's cross in government buildings, or that England has no laws that say the St George's cross may not be used, etc.
Your grossly misrepresenting your postition. Fennessy 16:26, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This has now been filed for mediation Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Template:UK subdivisions.--padraig 13:32, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

Merger with {{British dependencies}}

{{United Kingdom constituents and affiliations}} can cover the information included in {{British dependencies}}, so I suggest merging {{British dependencies}} into {{United Kingdom constituents and affiliations}}. --Wikipean (talk) 08:29, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2013 March 17#Template:British dependencies. Ego White Tray (talk) 04:14, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]