Talk:Channel Islands/Archive 1

Remove Paragrpah
"Other islands in the English Channel" There are other islands in the English Channel which are not part of the Channel Islands. Among these are the French islands Bréhat, Île de Batz, Chausey, Tatihou and Îles Saint-Marcouf, and the Isle of Wight which is part of England.

Why is this here, its like saying on the USA page, "other states in North America", it doesn't make sense.

Which secretary gives advice?
Am I right, that the Queen in Council is not anymore advised by the Home secretary, but by another secretary? 10:43, 23 Nov 2003 (GMT)
 * Indented line The UK Ministry of Justice is responsible for UK-Channel Island relations, so the relevant minister is the Secretary of State for Justice. The relationship is discussed by the House of Commons Justice Committee in this March 2010 report: www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmjust/56/56i.pdf. Andrew Le Sueur (talk) 12:28, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Duchy of Normandy
Are the Channel Islands really still officially part of the Duchy of Normandy, or did they cease to be so either in 1204 or 1259? Psmith 03:03, 11 Oct 2003 (UTC)

The Queen is the Duke of Normandy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.167.69.4 (talk) 07:39, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Languages
Could someone add something about the languages spoken on the islands? English is the main language, with only small numbers now still speaking Jersey French 17:27, Nov 6, 2003 (UTC)
 * Guernsey patois is based on Norman French, but like many regional dialects is dying out. Generally only older residents and a handful of enthusiasts still use the language. Until the Second World War, English was hardly spoken but the evacuation of half of the island's population to England ended centuries of tradition. Many children returned to Guernsey not knowing the patois.
 * Less than 1,000 people now speak the native ongue and most are over fifty.
 * neilinder - Any use?
 * I've lived in Guernsey for 20 years and never heard "patois". Portugese is now quite common because of the large population of seasonal workers. French can also be heard from the many visiting tourists during the summer. --DamienG 00:30, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Are you sure that some of the "French" you are hearing is not, in fact, the patois? Funnyhat 09:06, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * For further information on Jersey please visit


 * The languages of the Channel Islands are part of the Norman-French langage which was dominant in France in the Middle ages, finally giving way to the French of Ile de France. It should be remembered that it was Norman-French which modified Anglo-Saxon to become the English language.  Guernsey-French has remained purer than that of Jersey which, being physically closer to France, has adopted more of the language of that country.  However, Guernsey itself has become more of an English-speaking community than Jersey.  I was present at a meeting of the Societe Guernesiase when it was suggested that recordings be made of Guernsey-English before it disappeared.  Marie de Garis, an authority on Guernsey-French was not amused, referring to Guernsey-English as 'transitional'.

Like many regional languages, those of the Channel Islands have been suppressed and not encouraged. To refer to them as 'dying' is a euphemism. There are late signs of some revival, but the instruments of repression remain.

There won't be a revival there are too many English people here now, Jersey/French surnamess are dissapearing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.167.69.4 (talk) 07:44, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Football clubs
Maybe this is a stupid question,but are there any (amateur)football clubs from the Channel Islands?
 * For Jersey football, see BBC Radio Jersey football. For Guernsey football, see BBC Radio Guernsey football. Any help? Man vyi 21:23, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Sark?
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-03-08-feudal-island_x.htm?csp=34

Latin names
I've summarised various theories on the Latin names question over at nrm:Îles d'la Manche for those who are interested. Man vyi 10:45, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

All these names seem to be Celtic: Sarmia for Sarnia? is probably for *Isarnia based on Celtic isarno : iron. Cf. Cernay (Sarneium, Sarnacum... ), Cernières ( Sarnerias ).... if this writing is correct. Riduna can be based on the celtic word rito- : ford (Cf. Welsh rhyd ) and the Celtic goddess Ritona. But the old name of Jersey: Angia (after Andium that sems to be Celtic ) is probably a corruption in the documents for augia < *aujo < *agwjo Germanic word for Island (Cf. -ey ). Nortmannus (talk) 09:13, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

My understanding is that the Antonine Itinary does not name all places, only some on a particular route, at a couple of days travel apart. Therefore when Riduna appears after Vectis (Wight), Riduna is probably refering to the coast of the land of the Redones tribe near Rennes. Sarnia two days more on toward Finisterre, so to try and apply the names to the islands would be somewhat dubious. I personally suspect that the island names of 2000 years ago would not be that far removed from the 1000 year old or present day names. For example the French spelling of Guernesey, Guer (e)nes ey still contains the Breton "enes" (island) element with a Norse "ey" suffix. 20 Sept 2012 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boullion (talk • contribs) 18:21, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Are there any films about the Channel Islands?
The main article could be improved if a link were made to a list of educational films featuring the Channel Islands. Does such a list exist? Or can such a list be created?

Does anybody know if there is a source somewhere (such as National Geographic) for documentaries on the Channel Islands?198.177.27.27 08:40, 11 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't know about a list, but there's The Channel Islands At War, which probably fits your requirements. I understand it's pretty popular.


 * There's also the fictional Island at War ITV series (liked by critics, less so by islanders, filmed in the Isle of Wight, set on a made-up island, and generally inaccurate).


 * And less relevant, but perhaps still worthy of inclusion, there are a few locally-produced fictional films. I can't easily find a list, but Zombey, while no blockbuster, is very good considering the budget and the age of the cast and crew.
 * Cosmogoblin (talk) 12:14, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

It is somewhat forbidden knowledge but in 1950 two sundry parts of the Channel Islands nearly fell to the never-ending NWO-backed French expansionism/annexation. Anyway, a 1959 film (starring Charlton Heston no less) is set on the British Minkies (Minquiers) hight: The Wreck of the Mary Deare https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wreck_of_the_Mary_Deare_(film) the — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.0.183.116 (talk) 21:25, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Are the Channel Islands a single unit or not?
I know in the article it says the Channel Islands are not a political unit, but it also says that they are remainder of the Duchy of Normandy. Considering the history of Britain, France and Normandy from the 1200s to today, wouldn't this mean that legally, they still constitute one duchy and therefore (at some level) one political unit? Was the Duchy of Normandy ever abolished? And since France went through all those revolutions and is now a republic, then wouldn't that mean, that legally the Channel Islands are the succeeding (and only) Duchy of Normandy since the Duchy in French Normandy was abolished?72.27.29.124 22:45, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Technically, they are still the Duchy of Normandy, in one sense. However, the problem with this is that the English monarchs eventually abandonned their claims to the Duchy of Normandy—meaning that they no longer ruled over Normandy.  The Channel Islands are in the unique position of still being a part of Normandy ruled over by a British Monarch who no longer rules Normandy.  Because of this, I expect that the government of the Islands was reconstituted, and they were no longer a "Duchy" after the loss of continental Normandy.  So while they may be considered one "unit" in an idealogical sense, they are politically quite distinct (to my knowledge).  I am not, however, an expert on this fairly complicated issue, and it would be nice for someone else who understand the situation better than I to provide an explanation.  The Jade Knight 10:59, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


 * As far as the Channel Islands go, I think the Duchy of Normandy could be classed as a national myth rather than a meaningful constitutional principle. Rather as in a constitutional monarchy, the momentum of democratic politics tends to hollow out the powers of the Crown until the monarch remains as a unifying symbol rather than a political force, so the separate development of democratic self-government in the Bailiwicks has tended to reduce the significance of the Crown. The main motivation for maintaining the Duchy as a national symbol has, I suggest, had historically more to do with preserving a distinction as against the United Kingdom, rather than fostering unity between the Bailiwicks. Man vyi 15:59, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


 * It seems like there is starting to be a unifying element to it, too, these days, what with the Fête des Rouaisons and all. The Jade Knight 01:42, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * One of the effects of the Bailiwicks being freer to establish international relations (short of diplomatic status), is that there is more interest in developing cultural, political and economic links not only with mainland Normandy but with Brittany as well. But co-operation with neighbours doesn't imply integration, of course. Man vyi 17:39, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


 * The United Nations Statistics Division routinely treats the islands as one single unit within the UN subregion called "Northern Europe". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.113.8.241 (talk) 08:57, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * According to that reference, it also treats them as separate units. Man vyi 11:12, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

About the "move" button on Occupation of the Channel Islands
Hi. The "move" button at the top of the Occupation of the Channel Islands does not appear for some reason. Has someone or something disabled it for some reason? If so, why? Thanks for helping me solve this mystery. IZAK (talk) 11:12, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Undos
Can't help but notice that my entry got undone for lacking 'citations in accordance with policy'. I was under the impression that citations were not required automatically (I note no references in the entire first paragraph of the article for instance). Unless someone is contesting the facts of what I wrote, can I presume this was simply someone being militant/enthusisatic with the undo button. Or are references to be forthcoming for the "fact" that "The respective capitals, St. Peter Port and St. Helier have populations of 16,488 and 28,310", or indeed that they are the capitals at all. I was under the impression that the general policy of wikipedia was to encourage contributions. 82.10.108.49 (talk) 20:21, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for writing. Yes, I at least welcome you and thank you. The information you added was as follows —
 * Railways were constructed on 3 of the Channel Islands. Two seperate companies operated lines on Jersey, being the largest island, another operated on Guernsey and a fourth on Alderney. After the 1930s, only the line on Alderney remained, and operates today as a short tourist line.
 * You should be able to find citations somewhere, either on- or off-line, for these statements. If you don't know how to format the citations, just stick them in any old way and somebody else will do the necessary editing. As for the other facts you mentioned – the population and the capitals, for example –  if you want to challenge them, you may do so by inserting  where you see a problem –  or you could just change the data if you want and see if anybody objects.  Citations may not be required if nobody objects to the content, but in general the rule is "Encyclopedic content must be wp:verifiable." Thanks for your attention, and please reinsert the information along with some source or sources to back it up. (It would be more encyclopedic if you actually gave the names of the lines in question, their dates of operation, etc.) Sincerely, your friend, GeorgeLouis (talk) 20:40, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

The main picture
The top picture on this article shows a circle round the Channel Islands and has the text "Jersey and Guernsey". Considering that this article is not just about these two islands, but all of the Channel Islands, and considering that Alderney can clearly be seen within the circle, and it is also a Channel Island, this image is very misleading and not brilliant to be the top image for this article. Could someone fix it so that the text says something like "the Channel Islands"? TomPhil 18:41, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * But Alderney and even Sark are a part of the Bailiwick of Guernsey. -- Phoenix (talk) 01:31, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

HMS Victory
The addition of the discovery of the wreck of HMS Victory has been reverted twice now. The first time because it was "unsourced" and the location was "unknown". I readded the wreck, with a source and location. This has now been removed as "being outside the Channel Islands". The wreck of Victory was long thought to have been near the Casquets, which is why I thought it would be relevant to the Channel Islands article. Mjroots (talk) 07:46, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * But now it has been found far away from the previously-supposed CI wreck site, the location of the wreck is now demonstrably irrelevant to the CI article - although the mention in the Casquets article is fair enough as the history of the ship and the aftermath of the wreck is connected with the Casquets. Man vyi (talk) 09:09, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Rewriting history to hide a terrible time
to []: you did not rewrite history for balance. you rewrote an article to obscure a terrible time in the island's history: the operation of four concentration camps (and one a death camp) on alderney soil. the alderney concentration camps are a fact. slave labor and mass murder is a fact. there is no balance in trying to a shameful time in europe's past. i will wait a few days, then revert the article. --diremarc (talk) 15:01, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
 * If I can butt in:


 * You seem to be under the impression this is the Alderney page.This information was already on the Alderney page; also at Occupation of the Channel Islands, and now Alderney concentration camps. So all that is necessary here on the Channel Islands page is a summary and a link, n’est ce pas? No-one is "rewriting history to hide a terrible time", least of all the people who live there. Moonraker12 (talk) 18:14, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

reverted to accurate WWII history
Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Channel Islands, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. User:Man vyi: you removed all mention of Alderney concentration camps; you removed every mention and every link to the four concentration camps on the island; you removed all mention and links to nazis, nazi germany and adolf hitler; you removed the relevant references; and you removed the "see also" list; you misstated the timing of the surrender; you removed the reference to the slow return of this islanders. what you did was censorship-you certainly did not "rewrite history for balance" (emphasis added). Please do not remove information from articles. Wikipedia is not censored, and content is not removed even if some believe it to be contentious. Please discuss this issue on the article's talk page to reach consensus rather than continuing to remove the disputed material. You also have the option to configure Wikipedia to hide the images that you may find offensive. --diremarc (talk) 06:41, 7 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks again for trying to add useful info. The problem with what you wrote (apart from the over-concentration on Alderney) was that what applies to Alderney does not necessarily apply to the islands as a whole - for example, the statement "The Channel Islands population was unable to start returning until December 1945." is simply not accurate. The first evacuees returned on the first sailing from the UK on 23rd June (ref: The German Occupation of the Channel Islands, Cruikshank). I did not "remove all mention of Alderney concentration camps". I'll be bold and reinsert the additional history and try and preserve a particular focus on Alderney during the Occupation if you think that appropriate, but I'll move some of the most specific Alderney material to the Alderney article where it is most pertinent. Man vyi (talk) 08:35, 7 June 2009 (UTC)


 * There is a question of fact, here.


 * Diremarc seems to be saying the garrison in the Islands surrendered on 16th May, but on Alderney 7 days later; Man vyi is saying the 9th and the 16th, is that right? Do either of you have a source for this?


 * Also Diremarc is saying the islanders didn’t return till December, Man vyi says June. Again, sources? Moonraker12 (talk) 18:18, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

bastant
Man vyi: sir, you are a charmer. thank you for your reasonable and calm demeanor. your revision is good. however, it is important to list the names of the four camps (Lager Borkum, Lager Helgoland, Lager Norderney, Lager Sylt). Also Moonraker12 you caught my calendar mistake. i rewrote that section and added refs to clarify. À la préchaine. --diremarc (talk) 19:23, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
 * If I can add my two pennyworth again:


 * In a 2-3 paragraph summary of the occupation, I think the most salient point about the camps on Alderney is that some 6000 people were imprisoned there and at least one in ten died/was killed, not the minutiae of the camp organization. So no, I don’t think it is important to list them.


 * The links could be more direct ( I’ve done that), and this sentence “(one week after the other Channel Islands and as one of the last remnant German surrenders)” could be clearer - it was better before (you might want to do that rather than me).


 * As for the image, it already appears on a number of pages. What this page needs is something that represents the occupation as a whole; German soldiers on the street, maybe, or a Liberation memorial. So I think it needs changing. Moonraker12 (talk) 09:38, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

changes
Moonraker12: comments and suggestions are always (almost) welcome
 * point 1: added the number of inmates and deaths, but the names if the camps are important and their links are needed.
 * point 2: rewrote last nazi german remnants sentence.
 * point 3: changed image to pic of fortifaction built by nazi slaves -- diremarc (talk) 21:11, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

OK, looks good

The image fits the bill, and the salient points are covered, and the link to the ACC page is there (is that yours BTW? I’ve left a note about the page there).

As for the list, if you still feel it’s necessary, we’ll have to agree to differ; maybe get another opinion on the subject.Moonraker12 (talk) 13:12, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Population of Lihou
Lihou is listed in "Geography" as "inhabited". My understanding is that it is not; that although the House is available for overnight booking, nobody lives permanently on the island. I don't think there's currently a residential caretaker. Unless anybody disagrees, I propose the following rewording:

The inhabited islands of the Channel Islands are Jersey, Guernsey, Alderney, Sark and Herm (the main islands); Jethou and Brecqhou (Brechou), all except Jersey in the Bailiwick of Guernsey. There are also uninhabited islets: Lihou (which can be booked for overnight stays), the Minquiers, ...

Cosmogoblin (talk) 12:46, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Channel Islands. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130722101415/http://www.gov.je/ChiefMinister/International+Relations/Profile+of+Jersey.htm to http://www.gov.je/ChiefMinister/International+Relations/Profile+of+Jersey.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 19:06, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Channel Islands. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120921052748/http://www.royal.gov.uk/MonarchUK/QueenandCrowndependencies/ChannelIslands.aspx to http://www.royal.gov.uk/MonarchUK/QueenandCrowndependencies/ChannelIslands.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 05:04, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Capitalization of "bailiwick"
The word "bailiwick" is inconsistently capitalized across this article. Which form is correct?--Adûnâi (talk) 00:34, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
 * In my view it should only be capitalized if it is part of a proper name ("Bailiwick of Guernsey") or if it is short for such a name. W. P. Uzer (talk) 07:04, 10 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Yeah, instances of "both Bailiwicks", "each Bailiwick" or similar should be changed to lower case. Rob984 (talk) 10:16, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 one external links on Channel Islands. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090507182642/http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk:80/content.aspx?activeTextDocId=1838152 to http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?activeTextDocId=1838152
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091001142348/https://www.opsi.gov.uk:80/RevisedStatutes/Acts/ukpga/1981/cukpga_19810061_en_8 to http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatutes/Acts/ukpga/1981/cukpga_19810061_en_8#pt5-l1g57
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110510011955/http://www.thisisjersey.com/2009/05/08/passion-plays-a-part-%E2%80%93-right-across-the-board/ to http://www.thisisjersey.com/2009/05/08/passion-plays-a-part-%E2%80%93-right-across-the-board/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:33, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Channel Islands. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.gov.je/ChiefMinister/International%2BRelations/Profile%2Bof%2BJersey.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110812153038/http://www5.gov.je/SiteCollectionDocuments/Government%20and%20administration/R%20Attorney%20General%20Transcript%2020100702%20WM.pdf to http://www5.gov.je/SiteCollectionDocuments/Government%20and%20administration/R%20Attorney%20General%20Transcript%2020100702%20WM.pdf
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?activeTextDocId=1838152
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatutes/Acts/ukpga/1981/cukpga_19810061_en_8

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:46, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Map
Some years ago, I produced this map of the Channel Islands: File:Channel_Islands.svg. It's not the nicest map in the world, but it seems more informative than the first of the two depicted in this article. Do you agree? Would you like to use it? --Oudeís talk 18:54, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree that your map is better than the old one (which contains text in the Polish language). I've replaced it now. Ross Finlayson (talk) 21:40, 25 October 2018 (UTC)