Talk:Great Britain and Ireland

Or as separate entities...
Can someone explain the logic of this and why it was agreed to include links to the separate entities? Per WP:DAB: 'Do not add a link that merely contains part of the page title'. I fail to see how someone looking for the United Kingdom, Republic of Ireland, Great Britain or Ireland would search 'Great Britain and Ireland', or similar. They wouldn't. I don't care if this was 'agreed after lengthy discussion'. This is a disambiguation page, it is not for clarifying the difference between the UK and Republic of Ireland. We assume the reader already knows what they are looking for. Rob (talk &#124; contribs) 09:16, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Hmmmm ... methinks its because of the general confusion/ignorance over whether "Ireland" refers to the island or the state. The separate entities section was included after lengthy discussion (some people would call that consensus) because "the phrase" or phrases can be encountered in many different contexts, and making the assumption that "the phrase" refers to a single entity is most often erroneous. In my opinion, the real problem is this dab page (especially if it means leaving out all the possible combinations and meanings). It should be redirected to Terminology of the British Isles. -- -- HighKing ++ 12:02, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I disagree with that last bit - I think it's right that this is a disambiguation page. But the "separate entities" thing is a bit odd. I'm wondering if the intention was to include them to try and emphasise that they are separate entities, or something like that.
 * Anyway, if there is a case for including links to the separate entities perhaps they could be done inline. WP:DABSTYLE says "Rarely should a bulleted entry have more than one navigable link" so this could be one of those exceptional cases. Something like:
 * I'm aware I've broken another guideline in there by pipelinking Republic of Ireland. So that's a suggested compromise but I'm not entirely convinced we need the separate entities linked at all. WaggersTALK  12:32, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm aware I've broken another guideline in there by pipelinking Republic of Ireland. So that's a suggested compromise but I'm not entirely convinced we need the separate entities linked at all. Wa</b><b style="color:#86D">g</b><b style="color:#75C">ge</b><b style="color:#83C">r</b><b  style="color:#728">s</b><small  style="color:#080">TALK  12:32, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Split?
I think the real problem is that we are trying to disambiguate multiple phrases with different meanings on one page. 'United Kingdom' ≠ 'Great Britain' ≠ 'Britain'. Maybe we should define each phrase at it's own page:


 * Please note, the order of the terms 'United Kingdom' and 'Ireland' can be changed per an agreed criteria (alphabetical, population size, common usage, etc), but it's not important right now.

This way we are actually defining the terms clearly, and in line with MOS, as oppose to trying to summarise the differences between the terms, in a format simply not designed to do so. I agree with High King, if we want these phrases to redirect to a page explaining there differences, then why not redirect to Terminology of the British Isles where this done effectively? Otherwise, we need to disambiguate (and therefore define) each phrase individually. Rob (talk &#124; contribs) 14:42, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Thinking about this, I still believe that a dab page is simply the wrong idea for what this page is trying to do. I mean, is "Great Britain and Ireland" an entity (today)? Or was it a common phrase when there was a "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland" that has since fallen into disuse? Today, in my opinion (i.e. not a shred of real evidence :-) the phrase is used to refer to two separate entities. Thinking it over, I believe the page should simple be redirected to a section in the "Terminology of the British Isles". -- HighKing ++ 20:20, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I think redirecting Great Britain and Ireland and Britain and Ireland to Terminology of the British Isles is something we should consider. However, I strongly believe United Kingdom and Ireland should have it's own disambiguation page. It is a phrase with clear meaning and can easily be disambiguated. Redirecting users who are most certainly either looking for UK–Ireland relations or the British Isles to here, or Terminology of the British Isles, is not helpful. Rob (talk &#124; contribs) 21:47, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm going to start a split proposal below for this. Rob (talk &#124; contribs) 22:29, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
 * If we think that users are typing "Great Britain and Ireland" when they mean to search for "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland" I don't see the logic in redirecting them to Terminology of the British Isles instead of United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. If, on the other hand, we think they might possibly mean something else, then a disambiguation page is exactly the right solution.
 * I can kind of see the logic in splitting the disambiguation page into separate disambiguation pages as Rob proposes, but I'm also aware we've only recently merged various redirects and disambiguation pages into this page. I'm keen that we don't endlessly fluctuate between these two states like some kind of slow motion edit war. <b style="color:#98F">W</b><b style="color:#97E">a</b><b style="color:#86D">g</b><b style="color:#75C">ge</b><b style="color:#83C">r</b><b  style="color:#728">s</b><small  style="color:#080">TALK  11:07, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Split proposal
I think we should create a new disambiguation page at United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland. 'Britain and Ireland', and 'Great Britain and Ireland' are highly ambiguous as they refer to either the states or the islands, while 'United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland' clearly refers to the states. We can further refine what the reader is looking by spiting this page:

Anything with either 'Republic of Ireland' or 'United Kingdom', can be redirected to United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland as the reader is clearly referring to the states, not the islands. For example, 'United Kingdom and Ireland', or 'Republic of Ireland and Britain'. Rob (talk &#124; contribs) 22:29, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I understand your thinking. I'm not a big fan of one big dab page tbh. Am I right in summarizing that where a term exists that is unambiguous, then locate the dab there instead? There's a nugget in this proposal - just trying to unearth it.   -- HighKing ++ 12:35, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't understand what you're asking. Please elaborate. Rob (talk &#124; contribs) 18:15, 29 July 2014 (UTC)


 * I oppose a split. It isn't that long ago that we merged various heavily overlapping pages into one place to avoid duplication of effort and confusion about what should and shouldn't be on each page. Yes the states and geographical entities are different, but the terms people use to refer to them are overlapping, inconsistent and precise. There is no benefit (indeed quite the opposite) from people having to visit more than one disambiguation page and no benefit from having duplicative disambigs. I'm not even really clear about what problem splitting will be able to solve that can't be done on one page? Thryduulf (talk) 22:25, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
 * It's as simply as 'United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland' ≠'Great Britain and Ireland'. Why should these be disambiguated on one page? Simply because the topics are similar? Splitting refines what the reader is looking for and therefore reduces confusion. We can give some readers a more refined set of results if we split the article. Why not? Duplication doesn't cause any problems. Rob (talk &#124; contribs) 22:49, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
 * People use all terms to refer to either geographical and political entities, so refining what people are looking for is not possible. Thryduulf (talk) 10:04, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Thryduulf is right. The point of a dab page is not to punish readers for typing the wrong thing ("You might mean x or y but you shouldn't use this phrase to mean z so we're not going to link to that from here"). When someone types "Britain and Ireland" they could mean the islands, they could mean the states (past or present), they could mean the terminology... it makes perfect sense to list all those options in one place and let the reader make an informed choice. <b style="color:#98F">W</b><b style="color:#97E">a</b><b style="color:#86D">g</b><b style="color:#75C">ge</b><b style="color:#83C">r</b><b  style="color:#728">s</b><small  style="color:#080">TALK  11:19, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * 'People use all terms to refer to either geographical and political entities'. That's simply not true. 'Great Britain', 'Britain' and 'Ireland' are used to refer to either geographical and political entities, but 'United Kingdom' and 'Republic of Ireland' are only used to refer to the political entities. This split only refines what readers making search queries with either 'United Kingdom' or 'Republic of Ireland' are looking for. When a reader searches either of those terms, they are clearly not looking for the islands, so why take them to a page which disambiguates the names of used to refer to the islands? Rob (talk &#124; contribs) 12:11, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Is there any evidence that (many) readers are searching for 'United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland'? I'm fairly sure such a dab page would be largely redundant, as it's not a popular search term. So what's being suggested isn't a split, it's essentially making the political entities a sub-dab-page of this one. It means readers would have to click on two links instead of one to get to the article they're looking for, and we'd have two dab pages to maintain instead of one, for no discernible benefit for either party. <b style="color:#98F">W</b><b style="color:#97E">a</b><b style="color:#86D">g</b><b style="color:#75C">ge</b><b style="color:#83C">r</b><b  style="color:#728">s</b><small  style="color:#080">TALK  13:12, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't see how readers would ever have to click two links instead of one... I have no idea where you have got that idea from. And no, I doubt many readers are searching precisely 'United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland'. But that isn't the only query which is obviously referring to the states (and hence would be redirect to the new page):
 * UK and Ireland
 * UK and Republic of Ireland
 * Britain and Republic of Ireland
 * Republic of Ireland and Great Britain
 * Ireland and the UK
 * And so on...
 * There are many search queries that are clearly only referring to the states. We can provide a refined set of results for readers searching these terms. Maintaining an additional disambiguation page in order to provide some readers with a more refined set of results is surely worthwhile? In my opinion, this page is confusing. Maybe it has to exist, but it's confusing. And if we can redirect some readers to a more refined set of results, which wont be so confusing, then I think we should.
 * I rarely support splitting pages like this. I think it's nonsensical that Britain and Great Britain (disambiguation) are separate pages (and I will probably propose a merge soon). But in this case, I really think we could benefit some readers by spiting the page.
 * I know, I'm repeating myself, I'm sorry. But from your replies, it's clear that you don't realise, or agree with, the benefits of this proposal.
 * Rob (talk &#124; contribs) 14:48, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Apologies, I misunderstood the proposal - I thought you were trying to separate the disambiguated items into geographical and political entities, so that someone searching for something that could be either (such as 'Britain and Ireland') would only be served one set of 'results'. I'm still not convinced the status quo is broken and needs fixing though. <b style="color:#98F">W</b><b style="color:#97E">a</b><b style="color:#86D">g</b><b style="color:#75C">ge</b><b style="color:#83C">r</b><b  style="color:#728">s</b><small  style="color:#080">TALK  12:48, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Arbitrary break
Generally, I don't think a few irrelevant entries causes any inconvenience for a reader. However, I think this page specifically potentially confuses readers because, unlike most disambiguation pages, the terms being disambiguated are not synonymous, and it's not clear as to which terms are being disambiguated to which entries. For example, if a reader were to search: 'Britain and the Republic of Ireland' and then read 'Great Britain and Ireland, two islands off the north-western coat of continental Europe', they may interpret the page as implying that 'Britain and the Republic of Ireland' may refer to 'two islands off the north-western coat of continental Europe'. In essence, I think the split will ensure both disambiguation pages are only disambiguating terms which may refer to all entries on the page, and therefore, to some extent, improving clarity. It also improves presentational consistency as I'm not aware of any other pages disambiguating two or more terms that aren't synonymous. Rob (talk &#124; contribs) 20:06, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I think I understand where you're coming from now, but the word "synonymous" is the wrong word to be using. Disambiguation pages exist to differentiate between the different meanings of the same (or similar) phrases. By definition the contents of disambiguation pages won't be synonymous - that's the whole point of them! I think the word you mean is homonymous - in other words, talking about "Great Britain" when the user has searched for "United Kingdom" is misleading. I think I agree with that for the most part - although there are still people who refer to the UK as an island.
 * The page already deals with this though with the first sentence - "Great Britain and Ireland, Ireland and the United Kingdom and similar phrases may refer to:" makes it clear the list is not just about 'Britain and the Republic of Ireland' or any other specific phrase, but a host of similar phrases. <b style="color:#98F">W</b><b style="color:#97E">a</b><b style="color:#86D">g</b><b style="color:#75C">ge</b><b  style="color:#83C">r</b><b  style="color:#728">s</b><small  style="color:#080">TALK  10:49, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * It makes clear that the list is not just about one specific term, but it still doesn't make clear which terms refer to which entries. It would be clearer to some extent to split the page right? Rob (talk &#124; contribs) 11:39, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * But on the other hand, the explanations for the different terms is already provided at "Terminology of the British Isles"... and that is the reason why I believe this page should really link there. But.  Rob makes a good point in that *some* of the phrases are unambiguous (such as UK and ROI) and perhaps there's a case to be made for unambiguous terms to not point to the terminology page. But right now, I still haven't heard anything that makes me think we need this page to provide explanations that are already provided somewhere else.  Thoughts?  -- HighKing ++ 17:08, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * One issue at time HighKing. We should establish a consensus on this slit proposal before considering redirecting the page. Also, if this is split, then I think you would have a stronger argument for redirecting the page to Terminology of the British Isles. Rob (talk &#124; contribs) 20:18, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Sorry I wasn't clear previously. I agree that some terms are unambiguous, and therefore don't need a dab page, and therefore should have their own page(s). Is that what is being proposed? The other terms we can deal with later. Is it possible to list the search terms that are unambiguous? For example, what are your thoughts on someone searching for "United Kingdom and Ireland"?   -- HighKing ++ 16:42, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Maybe we should go through some case-by-case examples as clearly there won't be a one-size-fits-all solution for all search terms related to this topic. I disagree that a simple redirect to the terminology example is going to work in the majority of cases. If someone searches for "United Kingdom and Ireland" they might be interested in the terminology but I think it more likely that they would be looking for Ireland–United Kingdom relations, with United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland a distant third. Because of that uncertainty, a disambiguation page makes sense; the alternative would be a redirect to Ireland–United Kingdom relations with a hatnote but given the number of terms that could redirect there I think that would be too messy.
 * If someone searches for "United Kingdom and Ireland" I agree with Rob that it's unlikely (but not impossible) that they really mean British Isles, and almost certain that they don't mean Great Britain and/or Ireland. But I'm not convinced that warrants creating a separate DAB page for a term that's very rarely searched for:
 * {| class="wikitable"

! Month !! Searches for "United Kingdom and Ireland"
 * August 2013 || 16
 * September 2013 || 31
 * October 2013 || 24
 * November 2013 || 15
 * December 2013 || 15
 * January 2014 || 13
 * February 2014 || 18
 * March 2014 || 18
 * April 2014 || 30
 * May 2014 || 24
 * June 2014 || 17
 * July 2014 || 21
 * }
 * Those figures are of course artificially high in some months because of the likes of us doing the search when it's under discussion! <b style="color:#98F">W</b><b style="color:#97E">a</b><b style="color:#86D">g</b><b style="color:#75C">ge</b><b style="color:#83C">r</b><b  style="color:#728">s</b><small  style="color:#080">TALK  08:13, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
 * You need to take into account all the terms that could be redirect to the separate disambiguation page. Not just 'United Kingdom and Ireland':
 * 'Ireland and the United kingdom'
 * 'Republic of Ireland and Britain'
 * 'UK and Ireland'
 * And so on...
 * Also, the only term on this page which would mislead readers searching for the states is 'Great Britain and Ireland'. All the others could be included on the new disambiguation page without causing any confusion. We don't have to excluded 'British Isles'.
 * Rob (talk &#124; contribs) 13:13, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
 * June 2014 || 17
 * July 2014 || 21
 * }
 * Those figures are of course artificially high in some months because of the likes of us doing the search when it's under discussion! <b style="color:#98F">W</b><b style="color:#97E">a</b><b style="color:#86D">g</b><b style="color:#75C">ge</b><b style="color:#83C">r</b><b  style="color:#728">s</b><small  style="color:#080">TALK  08:13, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
 * You need to take into account all the terms that could be redirect to the separate disambiguation page. Not just 'United Kingdom and Ireland':
 * 'Ireland and the United kingdom'
 * 'Republic of Ireland and Britain'
 * 'UK and Ireland'
 * And so on...
 * Also, the only term on this page which would mislead readers searching for the states is 'Great Britain and Ireland'. All the others could be included on the new disambiguation page without causing any confusion. We don't have to excluded 'British Isles'.
 * Rob (talk &#124; contribs) 13:13, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Rob (talk &#124; contribs) 13:13, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

"Ireland and the United Kingdom"
Moving on from the discussion above, I think Ireland–United Kingdom relations is the primary topic of this phrase. I propose we redirect all phrases including the terms "Republic of Ireland" and/or "United Kingdom" to Ireland–United Kingdom relations. Thoughts? Rob984 (talk) 18:55, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Anybody object to redirecting these terms to Ireland–United Kingdom relations per WP:PRIMARY TOPIC?
 * Rob984 (talk) 19:53, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Anybody object to redirecting these terms to Ireland–United Kingdom relations per WP:PRIMARY TOPIC?
 * Rob984 (talk) 19:53, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Anybody object to redirecting these terms to Ireland–United Kingdom relations per WP:PRIMARY TOPIC?
 * Rob984 (talk) 19:53, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Anybody object to redirecting these terms to Ireland–United Kingdom relations per WP:PRIMARY TOPIC?
 * Rob984 (talk) 19:53, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Anybody object to redirecting these terms to Ireland–United Kingdom relations per WP:PRIMARY TOPIC?
 * Rob984 (talk) 19:53, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Anybody object to redirecting these terms to Ireland–United Kingdom relations per WP:PRIMARY TOPIC?
 * Rob984 (talk) 19:53, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Anybody object to redirecting these terms to Ireland–United Kingdom relations per WP:PRIMARY TOPIC?
 * Rob984 (talk) 19:53, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Anybody object to redirecting these terms to Ireland–United Kingdom relations per WP:PRIMARY TOPIC?
 * Rob984 (talk) 19:53, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Anybody object to redirecting these terms to Ireland–United Kingdom relations per WP:PRIMARY TOPIC?
 * Rob984 (talk) 19:53, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Anybody object to redirecting these terms to Ireland–United Kingdom relations per WP:PRIMARY TOPIC?
 * Rob984 (talk) 19:53, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Anybody object to redirecting these terms to Ireland–United Kingdom relations per WP:PRIMARY TOPIC?
 * Rob984 (talk) 19:53, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Anybody object to redirecting these terms to Ireland–United Kingdom relations per WP:PRIMARY TOPIC?
 * Rob984 (talk) 19:53, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Anybody object to redirecting these terms to Ireland–United Kingdom relations per WP:PRIMARY TOPIC?
 * Rob984 (talk) 19:53, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Anybody object to redirecting these terms to Ireland–United Kingdom relations per WP:PRIMARY TOPIC?
 * Rob984 (talk) 19:53, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Rob984 (talk) 19:53, 31 October 2014 (UTC)


 * This seems to make sense. The fact that the two states are linked to in the first sentence of that article means that if someone wasn't looking for that topic, they'd still have a link to their topic of interest right there. <b style="color:#98F">W</b><b style="color:#97E">a</b><b style="color:#86D">g</b><b style="color:#75C">ge</b><b style="color:#83C">r</b><b  style="color:#728">s</b><small  style="color:#080">TALK  12:50, 3 November 2014 (UTC)


 * ✅. Rob984 (talk) 18:24, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Requested move
<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;">
 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page. Note that this is a navigational page; as Newyorkbrad brought up in the deletion discussion so long ago, "The page briefly and usefully discusses use of the term 'Great Britain and Ireland.'" While there is some dispute here as to whether this is a common or accurate term, the disambiguation page is working as intended by presenting all possible targets, and the discussion below shows no consensus to move at this time. Dekimasu よ! 15:33, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Great Britain and Ireland → Britain and Ireland – In academic use, "Great Britain" refers solely to the island, while "Britain" may refer to either the island or the state. Therefore, in academic use, "Great Britain and Ireland" refers only to the islands. This article shows uses of phrases which refer to both the islands, and the states. Therefore I think "Britain and Ireland" is a more appropriate title. Rob984 (talk) 19:22, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Strong support as per official and, as a resident of our horendusly overcrowded little land, the sooner we stop advertising ourselves as "Great" the better. Gregkaye  ✍ ♪  23:45, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose and suggest re-ordering of the current list. The most obvious use-case for this - in fact I'm surprised this title doesn't redirect there already - is United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.  Which, well, has "Great Britain" in the title.  And should probably be 1st on the list.  Nom's argument seems wrong to me - as stated above, this phrase usually refers to the historical state to my knowledge, so the claim it refers "only to the islands" is off.  (And the backup argument for this move is apparently that Britain really isn't that great, which, uh, no comment). SnowFire (talk) 00:13, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure why that matters? There's no primary topic here so we should treat every topic equally. All the topics on this page (including United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland) may be referred to as "Britain and Ireland". This is not the case for "Great Britain and Ireland". Rob984 (talk) 00:25, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
 * And if you want to redirect Great Britain and Ireland to United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland per WP:PRIMARY TOPIC, then this pages needs to be moved to a different title. Rob984 (talk) 00:37, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
 * It would be acceptable for me to move this disambig page to "Britain and Ireland" and redirect this directly to United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, yes. But I'd be opposed to having Great Britain and Ireland be a redirect to Britain & Ireland. SnowFire (talk) 18:47, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Why? Rob984 (talk) 19:56, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
 * And I oppose redirecting "" to United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. Most sources using the phrase are referring to the two islands geography, so "British Isles" is a likely topic. Rob984 (talk) 20:07, 31 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Support Britain and Ireland is the more frequent form when talking about a set. Great Britain and Ireland sounds to me like it is talking mere about the individual islands conjoined by the word and. Also, a number of other pages redirect here: United Kingdom and Ireland and UK and Ireland. I'd suggest simply dropping off the first listing ("Great Britain and Ireland, two islands") and simply list things things that the term (and not terms) may refer to. --Tóraí (talk) 22:07, 31 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Support per nom and Tóraí. <span style="font-family:Verdana, sans-serif">Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 11:28, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment "Britain and Ireland" can be used to refer to both the geographic region, or the political entities. I've been against these articles from the start, mainly because I disagree that "Britain and Ireland" is a singular collective term. I also disagree that "UK and Ireland", or most of the other examples, are singular collective terms. I've said it before, but the best option is to redirect this page to Terminology of the British Isles, where it is already fully explained. While I don't at this point in time oppose the proposed move, I also don't believe it is the correct option. Comments?  -- HighKing ++ 15:43, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
 * We could redirect various terms to various locations per WP:PRIMARY TOPIC. For example, the vast majority of uses of the term "" refer to the relations, so could be redirect to Ireland–United Kingdom relations; and the vast majority of uses of the term "" refer to the geography of the two islands, and so could be redirected to British Isles. I don't support your proposal because you're assuming the reader is searching these terms without knowing what they are looking for. I think we can direct the majority of users to the topic they are looking for. The few who are unsure can use the link in the "See also" section to Terminology of the British Isles. Rob984 (talk) 17:09, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
 * They're good points Rob984, and I'd go along with that suggestion, as opposed to simply renaming the currect article as I don't believe it solves anything. I'm not opposing the rename, just (slowly) coming around to what you've been suggesting all along above. -- HighKing ++ 22:39, 2 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Weak oppose. Frankly I don't see the point of a move - either way a reader searches for a term and is presented with this same disambiguation page, albeit with possibly a slightly different title at the top. Arguing about "academic use" seems irrelevant as not all our readers are academics or using Wikipedia for academic activities. <b style="color:#98F">W</b><b style="color:#97E">a</b><b style="color:#86D">g</b><b style="color:#75C">ge</b><b style="color:#83C">r</b><b  style="color:#728">s</b><small  style="color:#080">TALK  12:55, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I think "Britain and Ireland" is more ambiguous then "Great Britain and Ireland". Yes, to some readers, "Great Britain and Ireland" may be used to refer to Ireland–United Kingdom relations, but most readers would consider that incorrect. Whereas, most readers would regard "Britain and Ireland" as correct in referring to Ireland–United Kingdom relations (both terms being generally accepted names for either state). Rob984 (talk) 15:57, 3 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment, this disambiguation article should be deleted, IMHO. GoodDay (talk) 15:30, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't agree with deleting (and you technically can't). "Britain and Ireland" could refer to either Ireland–United Kingdom relations or British Isles. However "" should possibly be redirected to British Isles and "" to Ireland–United Kingdom relations per WP:PRIMARY TOPIC. If that is the case, then this page must be moved to either "" or another term. You can't delete this page because there are sources that show "" being used to refer to Ireland–United Kingdom relations and British Isles. So the only options are the status quo, or redirect. See my proposal above for "". Rob984 (talk) 15:57, 3 November 2014 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

MOSDAB overrides grammar?
This edit removes the definite article from before "United Kingdom" and Republic of Ireland on the grounds that WP:MOSDAB says the "The link should come at the start of the entry."

This literalistic interpretation is probably wrong based on meaning - the guideline intends, I would say:


 * John Smith (1900-1999), Australian bartender and hang-glider pilot.

Rather than


 * The Australian bartender and hang-glider pilot, John Smith (1900-1999).

Even if it it did not, it would be wrong to subvert good English to comply with it.

All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 18:35, 24 August 2015 (UTC).


 * I don't think it is incorrect grammar. It mentions the phrase, then, after a comma, describes what the phrase means. If it were using the phrase it would be incorrect, for example: "Republic of Ireland and United Kingdom are two sovereign states". Rob984 (talk) 21:16, 24 August 2015 (UTC)