Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:29, 24 August 2008

This template must be substituted. Replace {{Requested move ...}} with {{subst:Requested move ...}}.

Ireland A‑class Top‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject IrelandTemplate:WikiProject IrelandIreland A This article has been rated as A-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Template:V0.5 Template:FAOL

Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.

1. Archive 1
2. Archive 2
3. Archive 3
4. Archive 4
5. Archive 5
6. Archive 6
7. Archive 7

Name Mediation

After another debate on this issue (different talk page) the suggestion of mediation was made to finally end it. The request is at the top of the page. People who have discussed this issue before are included.WikipÉire 15:21, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Where is the other debate, on a different talk page, that decided mediation should take place and that you refer to? ww2censor (talk) 15:32, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Talk: United Kingdom is the place you seek. GoodDay (talk) 15:37, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but what's going on here now? Wikipéire starts a holy war on another article, and then opens a request for mediation with editors who were not involved in that debate, and on a topic ('move "Republic of Ireland" to "Ireland"') which has had no overt discussion here for 4 or 5 weeks? Am I getting this right? Guliolopez (talk) 16:11, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Pretty much. Should be interesting to watch at least. Narson (talk) 16:56, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Yawn, yawn. This topic has been discussed about every 6 months and no consensus has ever been reached to change the status quo, so User:Wikipéire keeps flogging the same dead horse until he drives away enough decent editors and gets his way. Drop it for once and for all. It's old hat and boring. Let me repeat that, it's boring. Mediation is unneeded and unwarranted, User talk:Wikipéire likely wants to just bring in more people who have little knowledge of the topic and can be convinced by his constant pushing. ww2censor (talk) 17:57, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I personally perfer Ireland (state) or Ireland (country). But, whatever's decided at Mediation? IMHO, should be respected for at least 12-months. GoodDay (talk) 18:30, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

ww2c is right. This is just flogging a dead horse, and there is no need for mediation. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:55, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Just as long as no-one takes pictures of it, otherwise I think we fall afoul of the new British extreme porn laws. Narson (talk) 18:59, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Your reaction is just what I expected. You've always been against the move. Just because something has been there for a long time don't mean its right. I would have thought for WikiProject members getting the main country's name right would be important for an encyclopedia! Anyway we'll see what the mediation brings.WikipÉire 19:45, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

What? Me or BHG? I only just got brought into this...and there is no moral imperative in the wikipedia naming of the article and what is correct is a matter of perspective. Narson (talk) 19:53, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh sorry not you. I was talking plurally to most of the other editors who have commented so far. Should have placed my comment better.WikipÉire 19:55, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipéire, it's absolutely fine to believe that you are right, but what's not fine is that you don't seem to accept that other editors can legitimately disagree with you, and that repeatedly raising the same issue is disruptive. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:16, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

I've volunteered to mediate this issue within the Mediation Cabal; however only if people from both camps want to go through with it - see my comments on the case page for a possible goal. I just mention it in case some of the involved editors don't watch the case page - I'll just keep it open for a while. Averell (talk) 08:20, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I think we need to try mediation here. Sarah777 (talk) 21:19, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Closed the case. Only the "pro-move" camp supported the mediation, plus the original requester was banned permanently. Averell (talk) 10:29, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Gay rights

Why has Ireland got a section on gay rights? I don't want to start an argument over gay rights but I don't see this on any other country article. Is this just a backlash of some sorts against the catholic church! Joe Deagan (talk) 02:07, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

It may be because (as you note) historically Ireland was "culturally conservative" in that area, and it may be that some editors believe that including it highlights a cultural change in the outlook on some issues. Possibly. Personally I'm not sure it's an appropriate yardstick/measure for social trends or the change to a more "liberal" or open society. But then maybe it's as good as any other. With regard to "why Ireland and not elsewhere". I suppose - possibly - it's because some editors believe the polls show Irish society to be more tolerant/accepting/aware/balanced/whatever than others. Again, I couldn't say one way or the other whether it's any more appropriate to include in the Ireland article than elsewhere. Certainly the main UK article doesn't mention it. Even though LGBT partnerships do have full legal equality there - way more demonstrative of a "progressive" outlook than a simple poll. Anyway. I don't see any reason to take it out. Unless it grows into something more extensive. At which point it should be moved to LGBT rights in the Republic of Ireland. Guliolopez (talk) 21:18, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

New City And Towns Template

I see a new template has been added to the article listing Ireland's towns and cities by population by user:Drog lad. This brings the little known and slow moving Drogheda/Dundalk population dispute to the the main Ireland article. I didn't bother much when it was confined to Dundalk and Drogheda (see also asociated talk pages), but now that it's spilled over I'd like people to take a look at this alarming grave minor dispute. Fribbler (talk) 10:42, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Why do we even need this templatecruft when there ia a perfectly good list List of towns in the Republic of Ireland/2006 Census Records available instead of taking up so much space and adding more code to an already large page which is 92kb long? We should actually be reducing the page size not increasing it. ww2censor (talk) 14:11, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey relax i was just fowolling the list of 100 Largest Towns in IrelandDrogLad 16:03, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

What is this?

The table below I have removed from the article as it is hopelessly confused; some of the stats refer to counties, some to towns and the Dublin figure is was the figure for the GDA which actually includes many of the others on the list (eg Tallaght). And Dundalk seems to have gone missing. Sarah777 (talk) 22:50, 20 June 2008 (UTC) Template:Infobox largest cities

I think Drogheda was given Dundalk's population figure? Bastun 23:05, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Looks like it. Surely we need to keep the Dundalk v. Drogheda issue out of here? Sarah777 (talk) 23:09, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Agreed on several counts. The table is vague in it's definitions of town/city boundaries - In some cases it includes the exact town or city boundaries. And in other cases takes "urban area" or "town + environs" numbers. As a result, its accuracy is a little uncertain, and it therefore has very limited value. Similarly, because of this "vagueness" it brings the (sometimes troublesome) question of "which town is bigger" into a new and unnecessary forum. And finally, there is no need for this type of table in this article. We already have lists such as List of towns in the Republic of Ireland/2006 Census Records. The main country article doesn't benefit from having this data hashed up and dumped here. (No matter how prettily packaged). Guliolopez (talk) 23:45, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Name of Border article

At Talk:Republic of Ireland-United Kingdom border, I have proposed that the name be changed to comply with diplomatic protocol. Please comment. --Red King (talk) 23:38, 24 June 2008 (UTC) 24.20.169.126 (talk) what with the polls mentioned, where most north protestants feel British, and only a very small minority (3%) actually considering themselves Irish, I would have to agree, this seems the most appropriate. if you think about it, arguments about calling it "Republic of Ireland" vs. "Ireland" are simply mimicking the great argument between north and south. Calling it "Ireland" would be speaking to the geography of the land, while "Republic of Ireland" would be speaking to the political boundaries of Southern Ireland.

I agree with Red King regarding this, because it discusses the politics of the Island & the politics of Britain. What better title than one that defines the politics?

-Crystal Sage 24.20.169.126 (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 18:30, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Title of Wiki page incorrect

The title of the Wiki page should be "Ireland" - as explained in the main article. The title "Republic of Ireland" is incorrect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tmacmanus (talk • contribs) 10:39, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Garda

There should be a section on the above topic. ZoofanNZ (talk) 10:12, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Hatnote

A hatnote has been added to List of basic Republic of Ireland topics, the work on just one editor: The Transhumanist. I don't think the new hatnote to a list deserves any greater prominence than any other list already in the current "See also" section. Is this an attempts to replace the much older and much more comprehensive List of Ireland-related topics that has been around since early 2004 and if anything that should be the hatnote? Besides which, we certainly don't need both, essentially duplicate, lists. Any other opinions? ww2censor (talk) 04:10, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

You summarized the List of Ireland-related topics well: it is more comprehensive. The List of basic Ireland topics on the other hand is intended to be a general overview of the subject, much like the main article Republic of Ireland, but focused on links instead of prose. Unlike the more comprehensive list, it is intended to be an outline and is less index-like because of its scope (its scope is limited, whereas the related-topics list is not and has the potential to grow much much larger - see the Japan example below). Another difference is that the basic list is a member of a set of such lists (one for every country of the world) currently under construction. They are coming along nicely, and share a common format. See the rest at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Lists of basic topics#Basic topics lists for countries).

The two lists in the set that are the most complete are List of basic France topics and List of basic Japan topics (notice the format of the more comprehensive List of Japan-related topics). Please help to complete the List of basic Republic of Ireland topics to this high standard. Thank you. The Transhumanist    04:31, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Transhumanist. You appear to have added this "hatnote" convention to several country articles, and in doing so have created a kind of new "standard" for country related lists, and a new standard for header formats for country articles. Did you discuss this anywhere before going ahead and making changes accross so many articles? Personally I'm with Ww2censor. I don't really see what value is added by these lists. Many articles already have navboxes, "main" style nav templates and other devices to link users to the relevant "sub-articles". I don't see the value in superceding all of those with your new format. Any nods to WP:CON before you did all this? Guliolopez (talk) 10:42, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

There's no new standard. Yet. It's just a test run. Of the 200+ county articles, I only changed the hatnote on about 20. We should see if the links actually get used - if you don't object, that is. I plan to use the hit counter to check those list articles over the next few weeks, to see if their traffic goes up. For curiosity's sake, if nothing else. If the traffic doesn't go up, then the links are useless and should be removed. I haven't sought consensus yet, because there's no data yet to bring to a discussion. If you'd like to reduce the number of test links to 10, that would be fine with me, but I figured since there are 20 completed lists, we might as well run the test on all of those (more data that way, and a test group of only 10 seems kind of scant - 20 seems about right). I look foward to your thoughts and ideas. The Transhumanist    22:12, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Be that as it may, I don't see that there should be any preference to a list as a hatnote over and above the prominence given to any other link in the "see also" section, so I suggest moving it there, as there is no agreement to having a hatnote on the page. You can still observe its popularity from there. ww2censor (talk) 23:27, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

I'm suggesting we move this article to Ireland (state). This move will move the article to

• the countries offical name and not a discription of the state
• the countries common name
• Will satisfy WP:DAB
• Remove the need to pipe link ] Gnevin (talk) 15:51, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

While I agree it is the correct thing to do, we should wait on this discussion until more info comes to light from the IMOS discussion.Pureditor 15:55, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Comment the Discussion at IMOS is going around in circles , this RM will either solve the naming issue or the pipe link issue , which will allow greater focus on the remaining issue Gnevin (talk) 15:59, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

• Disagree -- "Ireland (state)" is not "the countries offical name and not a discription of the state" nor is it "the countries common name" as claimed. "Ireland (state)" is a wikipedia disambiguation whilst we have the perfectly official description Republic of Ireland. Djegan (talk) 16:03, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
• Comment , official description so lets move France to French_Fifth_RepublicGnevin (talk) 16:13, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
• Disagree - while Ireland is the official declared name of the state it carries a political connotation. It is better to use the official state description as provided for in Ireland's own Republic of Ireland Act 1949.The Thunderer (talk) 16:07, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Comment You need to be consistent Thunderer, if you want to go back to that act, then we need to also take that period's position on Northern Ireland/Six Counties. We need to move on from old disputes and be consistent. --Snowded TALK 22:11, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comment What political connotation seems like your WP:POV to me, care to prove it? Gnevin (talk) 16:13, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment how about you proving that "Ireland (state)" is "countries offical name and not a discription of the state" and "countries common name"? Djegan (talk) 16:16, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
  • I thought it wasn't the countries common name as you claimed above is it now? Gnevin (talk) 16:17, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

I've always called it the Free State or the South. That's not out of disrespect, these are the names commonly used in the circles I grew up in - which were of mixed ethnicity.The Thunderer (talk) 16:27, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Of course it has a political connotation. Please don't insult my intelligence or your own Gnevin by asking me to prove it. We'd be here for a year and still not come to agreement. That's what happens over everything with Ireland, north & south. I'm not here to change the world, I'm just espousing common sense. Djegan, I happen to agree that the country's name is Ireland and believe their own 1937 Act is sufficient proof. That's what I mean about argument however - we could still be at this in a year.The Thunderer (talk) 16:20, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Are we talking about the country or the state here; thats what confuses people. Nobody denies that "Ireland" is the name of the country (in the broad sense) - but the state is something different, even though it is also officially "Ireland". Using the same for country and state is a nonsense. The states official discription is "Republic of Ireland" - and using that makes good sense. Djegan (talk) 16:22, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

My contention is that we should be showing some kind of tolerance here and setting an example to all Irish people no matter what nationality they are.The Thunderer (talk) 16:24, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comment What a disaster this would be if passed -- Education in Ireland (state), Foreign policy of Ireland (state), Economy of Ireland (state), etc. Amateurish encyclopedia titles. Djegan (talk) 16:27, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree.The Thunderer (talk) 16:30, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

What is the difference between the state and the country? We do use Republic of Ireland when describing what kind of government the state of Ireland has. Just like the US is a federal republic. But it's blue and wet is a description of a thing named water not its name Gnevin (talk) 16:28, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

The difference is six counties - jaysus man surely you knew that?The Thunderer (talk) 16:29, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

That's the difference between Island and State Gnevin (talk) 16:31, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Therein lies the problem however. Using the name Ireland for the state implies that it IS the whole island, which is exactly what it's supposed to imply. Common sense must prevail.The Thunderer (talk) 16:34, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

No it doesn't. No more that ROI implys that .Gnevin (talk) 16:38, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

The use of the name Ireland was instituted for political reasons. There can be no denying that - sorry.The Thunderer (talk) 16:46, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Nor can it be denied it was the right of the nation to pick what ever name it wanted political or otherwise and the nation it's government and it constitution are the only offical sources of the name of the country and that name is clearly stated as Ireland ! Gnevin (talk) 16:49, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

If that were true I would agree however the nation didn't pick the name as we all know. The Long Fella didn't give people choices like that.The Thunderer (talk) 16:52, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

And that matters to wiki, why? Article 4 ,is my final word on this ! Gnevin (talk) 16:57, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose. Of course it is sometimes called Ireland and sometimes Republic of Ireland, but why move it to an unnatural disambiguation when it's already located at its natural and the most common disambiguation name, the name just about everyone inside and outside of Ireland uses? Strange proposal. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 16:28, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

If this was was WP:DAB name it should be at Ireland (Republic) or Ireland (Republic of) per DAB .Gnevin (talk) 16:38, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Which looks absolutely daft and in my opinion is disrespectful to the people and government of Ireland and that MUST be avoided at all costs.The Thunderer (talk) 16:46, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

More silliness. Sigh. Djegan (talk) 16:50, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

What's silly about it? As far as I can see one of the major issues here are people with very avid, fundamental views and that is leading to disrespect and lack of good faith. In my opinion we should remove that from any discussion.The Thunderer (talk) 17:09, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

I was responding to the proposal "it should be at Ireland (Republic) or Ireland (Republic of)" -- isn't that just another way of proposing Republic of Ireland? Especially given the use of capital R in republic? Djegan (talk) 17:13, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

• Support - there is no other option other than using simply Ireland as the title with Ireland (island) as the dab for the geographical entity. The argument that the common and legal and internationally recognised name of a country can't be used on Wiki because it carries "political connotations" is mind-boggling in its implications for the names of Wiki-articles well beyond these islands. (The first of which would be, thankfully, the end of the term "British Isles"). Sarah777 (talk) 16:44, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

There's the current option and that's good enough.The Thunderer (talk) 16:47, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

No - it is contrary to Wiki policy. Maybe we should rename "Israel" to "The Zionist Entity" because the name is political? Sarah777 (talk) 16:53, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

There is similar disagreement over the name Israel. I fear that's not a good example. As you are aware though there are many who would prefer to see the ROI called something else and certainly YOU might agree that Northern Ireland is not properly named.The Thunderer (talk) 16:56, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

The use of Israel as a comparative example shows a gross lack of perspective. Do people really feel as victimised over the the 'ROI' and 'British Isles' as terms, as third-class Muslims feel genuinely oppressed in areas of Israel (or even regarding the whole state-creation issue of Israel?) How vain, and how stupid! I initially have sympathy with the BI and ROI issues, but when I hear this kind of victim mentality, and see a prosperous and thriving Ireland (whatever it is called), and an Irish people who are welcomed wherever they choose live, work or visit, I get completely turned off. Is there anything worse than this kind of rabble-rousing extremism, when so few are interested? Talking about keeping pure resentment alive. Using Israel as a comparison is just dumb dumb dumb. (this was my first paragraph! --Matt Lewis (talk) 19:10, 24 August 2008 (UTC) Sorry - Israel is a simply wild comparision)

Ignoring the unsigned troll; Israel appears to be a rather good comparison - that is the Wiki name of the place. It adds

For other uses, see Israel (disambiguation).

But, and this is the key point, the state is called simply Israel. Sarah777 (talk) 17:24, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Is the word "Ireland" better as the island, or as the state? I know a lot of people feel that geographical terms come first. As I'm not Irish, I'm personally on the fence.--Matt Lewis (talk) 17:15, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Stop been stupid Republic of Ireland has been sanctioned by Irish parliament, it wasn't forced on anyone. Djegan (talk) 16:57, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Warning: please stop calling people "stupid" - that is a clear breach of WP:CIVIL. Sarah777 (talk) 17:33, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Stop wiki-fiddling by misrepresenting my comments. Djegan (talk) 19:54, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

In the interests of fairness I think the argument is that the name hasn't been sanctioned by the Dail. It has been provided as the description of the state.The Thunderer (talk) 17:00, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Or Mediocre Britian , because claiming to be great is surely pov. When was ROI santioned by the dáil? And sure Article 4 outweighs any law Gnevin (talk) 16:58, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

The term Great Britain is geographical and not political however and article 4 doesn't exist anymore.The Thunderer (talk) 17:02, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Mediocre britian was a joke , i understand its meaning. Article doesn't exist anymore ,thats news to me and the supreme court, have you told them you've removed it? Gnevin (talk) 17:35, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Might be a joke but based on the "logic" being applied here if some politician used the phrase in the Commons it would be taken as "British Government policy"! Sarah777 (talk) 17:46, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Would the words have to be after each other because I'm sure the phase it's be a mediocre year for britain has been said in the commons , maybe call the article mediocre .... britain :D Gnevin (talk) 17:49, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

He he! To go with British (ahem) Isles ;)Sarah777 (talk) 18:48, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

• Disagree for all the reasons stated in the previous discussions this year already - sp. the silly season has arrived again this year! ww2censor (talk) 17:00, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

There is nothing remotely "silly" about trying to have my country called by its common, locally and internationally recognised legal name. Nothing. Sarah777 (talk) 17:28, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Sarah, don't read what is not there. Did I say the idea of this discussion was silly? No, but the fact that this is the third time this year makes this the silly season. ww2censor (talk) 17:48, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

• Support per common-usage & to avoid pipelinking. GoodDay (talk) 17:13, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

• Support per all the well established reasons above.Pureditor 17:40, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose. Must we go through this again? RoI is a dab invented by the Irish state, and passes WP:COMMON handily.Traditional unionist (talk) 17:43, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

It appears we must TU - but don't blame me! The RoI/Pipe was a solution that was working fine until some absolutists decided to try and suppress it thus bringing this article back into play again. Sarah777 (talk) 18:45, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Though not exactly the same thing: the Georgia situation was solved -Georgia (U.S. state), Georgia (country)-; why shouldn't the Irelands be solved easily. GoodDay (talk) 19:00, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

• Strongly oppose I agree Ireland is the official name but it is a misnomer. Blue-Haired Lawyer 19:22, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Comment So is Northern Ireland for that matter - what would you suggest for that Article? --HighKing (talk) 20:13, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

• Support Sarah's reasoning above concurs with my own view. The names of many states are problematic, but it is not for a group of Misplaced Pages editors to manufacture some supposed compromise. As the name of the state is Ireland according to the constitution, and as it is so registered at the United Nations, no alternative should be seriously considered. RashersTierney (talk) 19:52, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
• Support An encyclopedia does not makes points or play politics. The name of the state is "Ireland". --HighKing (talk) 20:14, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
• The ambiguity is an issue for me. Our core policy WP:NAME states "Titles should be brief without being ambiguous.", WP:DAB states "For disambiguating specific topic pages, several options are available: 1. When there is another term (such as Pocket billiards instead of Pool) or more complete name that is equally clear (such as Delta rocket instead of Delta), that should be used." Picking names on legislative grounds is not standard, see WP:OFFICIALNAMES. So given our policies and that I believe a new reader of en.wp is most likely to pick the longer form than guess correctly our bracketing disambiguation format, and that the long form is commonly enough elsewhere, I oppose. Knepflerle (talk) 20:16, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

• Support Although I am not wild about the alternative. ROI is no longer used and carries huge political baggage. Northern Ireland is now the undisputed official name (see amendments to the Irish Constitution) for what was contentiously called by some the Six Counties. Similarly Ireland is now Ireland in all official circles. It is not correct to argue that it is a misnomer, that is a POV Blue-Haired Lawyer --Snowded TALK 22:07, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

* Strongly oppose - RoI is the official description and a common name of the state properly called Ireland. The current solution is normal practice for disambiguating Ireland-the-island from Ireland-the-state. The current solution is clear - where the name is clearly stated to be Ireland, but the means to disambiguate Ireland-the-island from Ireland-the-state is intuitive and uses "the most common name of a person or thing that does not conflict with the names of other people or things" (WP:NAME). In reply to specific arguments put forward by the proposer:

--78.152.197.185 (talk) 22:26, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

• A-Class Ireland articles
• Top-importance Ireland articles
• A-Class Ireland articles of Top-importance
• All WikiProject Ireland pages
• Misplaced Pages pages with to-do lists
• Misplaced Pages pages with to-do lists, unused