Talk:Denmark–Ireland relations

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations 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.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ireland Start‑class Low‑importance

	Ireland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland 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.IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject IrelandTemplate:WikiProject IrelandIreland articles
Start	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Denmark Mid‑importance

	Denmark portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Denmark, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Denmark 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.DenmarkWikipedia:WikiProject DenmarkTemplate:WikiProject DenmarkDenmark articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Move to unspaced titles: Denmark–Ireland relations, India–Ireland relations, and Ireland–Philippines relations. Jafeluv (talk) 10:52, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

– Switch to just Ireland as "Republic of" is redundant. Delusion23 (talk) 18:57, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Republic of Ireland is not redundant, although it may be unnecessary. That these are relations with Dublin, not Belfast, is not unimportant to the articles. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:21, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support moves, since only states and not geographical features can have foreign relations. Nor can Northern Ireland, as a constituent part of the UK have such diplomatic relations. See also WP:IRE-IRL for agreed usage of Ireland and Republic of Ireland on Wikipedia where no such ambiguity arises. The moves would also be in keeping with the vast majority of similar articles dealing with Ireland's foreign affairs. RashersTierney (talk) 23:18, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: If this move is carried out, the dashes should be unspaced (e.g., Denmark–Ireland relations, not Denmark – Ireland relations). Powers ^T 13:09, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If that is more usual on the project, then no problem here. RashersTierney (talk) 22:49, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I concede that my initial title suggestions do contain that mistake; the unspaced ones should be used instead. Delusion23 (talk) 10:47, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support Only a state can have a relation with another state. WP:IMOS is pretty clear when the description should be used and this isn't one of them. --HighKing (talk) 20:09, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, until the article Republic of Ireland is moved to Ireland. GoodDay (talk) 21:04, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You mean 'till hell freezes over? RashersTierney (talk) 21:27, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support - rm redundancy. Snappy (talk) 13:50, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Proposer is correct about redundancy, and I also support Powers's correction suggestion above that the spaces should be elided from around the dash in the titles. — O'Dea (talk) 15:28, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per WP:IMOS. The state is the major componsent of these articles, so use Ireland (and use island of Ireland to refer to the island if necessary). Aside from that, there is no great concern over confusing the two Ireland in this instance so no need to dab with Republic of Ireland. --RA (talk) 16:22, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I'm relatively new to this so I haven't been part of the disucssions surrounding the naming of Ireland-related articles, but what about "Denmark-Éire relations"? Maethordaer (talk) 14:49, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good man Rashers! Yet again.....Sarah777 (talk) 20:26, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Only commenting to say that I agree entirely with Powers's comments that the dashes should be unspaced (see MOS:DASH). Jenks24 (talk) 05:52, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Denmark–Ireland relations. 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/20110719122627/http://www.embassyofireland.dk/home/index.aspx?id=41267 to http://www.embassyofireland.dk/home/index.aspx?id=41267

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:41, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]