Talk:Home Nations/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Celtic Frontier or County Boundary?

Added the following link

• Celtic Frontier or County Boundary? Competing discourses of a late nineteenth century British border

Bretagne 44 14:48, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Proposal to remove sentence regarding Orkney Movement and Shetland movement

User:82.109.88.66 has inserted the following sentence today:

"Shetland and Orkney also have small movements, which advocate their being separate nations from Scotland."

I propose that this passage is removed for the following reasons:

• As far as I understand it the Shetland Movement became defunct sometime around 1997, and a quick Google turned up no recent evidence of the Orkney Movement. They (Orkney and Shetland Movement) are listed under Category:Defunct political parties of the UK. Neither is registered as a political party with the Electoral Commission, and neither has a website.

• In addition, neither supported independence, but rather greater autonomy, and, far from being "separate" they had an electoral pact with the Scottish National Party for many years - Orkney and Shetland used to be the only scottish constituency the SNP did not contest.

In short, I can see absolutely no evidence of any political movements in the Northern Isles that advocate "being separate nations", either defunct or still extant.--Mais oui! 19:32, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

As no-one has any further information on this topic I am removing that sentence from the article.--Mais oui! 17:01, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Reversion

I have reverted to my earlier edits, as the summary given by the editor who reverted them is blatantly dismissive. "Over-complicated" is a ridiculous exaggeration of the more accurate and careful introduction to the article.

Ireland as a whole is still one of the Home Nations in rugby, was the original fourth nation, and its inclusion is complicated only due to recent political developments (relative to the history of the four nations of the British Isles).

Northern Ireland's new role as the successor to British Ireland in the line-up is clearly defined - no attempt is made in my edits to hide the fact that it serves as the fourth nation nowadays in many (but by no means all) instances.

zoney ♣ talk 16:57, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Firstly, I'd like to say that I find it incredibly rude that you did not bother to tell anyone that you'd put an explanation on the talk page and then had a go at me for not replying to it. Are editors meant to be psychic now?

Secondly, I want to stand by my point that there's no point in mentioning Ireland in the first paragraph. Ireland, as noted later in the article, is not a Home Nation and calling it one is incorrect (even if it is common). Mentioning it in the first paragraph adds to confusion (though there's no reason for it not to be mentioned later on). The point of the first paragraph is to say what the topic is as briefly as possible. This means referring to the contemporary usage, and not referring to any old-fashioned usage first (see gay, for example).

Older stuff does not belong in the first paragraph. Hence, the George Burley article starts with his current job as manager of Southampton, rather than his job as manager of Ayr United. If you're going to put older stuff in the first paragraph, you'd better say that the Home Nations were originally England and Wales; then England, Wales and Scotland; then...

However, the first paragraph is a lot more managable now that part of it has been moved elsewhere.

Nevertheless, people reading this article want to know what the current Home Nations are, not every minor historical detail. - Green Tentacle 22:46, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Home Nation is an archaic term. As such the proper form (the original one) should be introduced first. The partition in Ireland is the only reason for the modern confusion of the term - and in fact, were there only one football (soccer) governing body on the island - there probably wouldn't even be an issue at all! I am reverting this back to the more technically correct, and indeed far more careful (my version does not dismiss the modern usage of Northern Ireland rather than Ireland, but rather merely follows on with that fact from the earlier sentence).

The Home Nations are more cultural and traditional divisions rather than political distinctions.

My request to "please reply" was merely to initiate discussion - I wasn't suggesting you should have read my comment earlier - indeed I hadn't posted it at the time of my earlier edits.

Also, for future reference, it is not proper form to mark reversions as minor edits.

zoney ♣ talk 13:36, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

So a term still used in comtemporary official government documents is archaic. Okay...

The term is still used now and refers to England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Its usage has always been rare.

The term is not a sporting one and, personally, I think think that this article spends far too long discussing its use in sports and when it is incorrectly applied to certain sports.

Finally, do you have any evidence at all that the term was even in use when all of Ireland was part of the UK? The only way in which your version would be accurate would be if the term was introduced after the union with Ireland (1801), but before the creation of Irish Free State (1922). - Green Tentacle 18:37, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes - the term is still used now, but referring to Northern Ireland. There's a good reason for this - the rest of Ireland is no longer British!

As to your early date of 1801 - that's not at all linked to the concept of nations. Just because Ireland was self-governing (although only in a devolved sense) prior to that - does not mean it was regarded as any less British. The concept of the four nations in the British Isles is centuries old - even if the "home nations" term is not (although I think it is fair to say the term is older than 80 years!)

zoney ♣ talk 21:36, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes - the term is still used now, but referring to Northern Ireland.

That's exactly my point - the article should reflect that and not a historical usage that you still have not proved actually existed. - Green Tentacle 21:48, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I haven't bothered to look up proof because it is elementary that the term "Home nations" could only realistically have been coined while Ireland was under a single jurisdiction. The four nations of the British Isles are and have been for recent centuries, Ireland, England, Scotland and Wales. The harp in various British emblems/arms represents Ireland - not "Northern Ireland" - even if that area now takes the role of "British Ireland".

Since you insist on at least one source - here you go (I'm sure there's more, and in various contexts - but why should I search this just to please you - one disgruntled editor who seems ignorant of the historical concept of Ireland as one of four British nations?):

From [1]

The Home Nations was in fact the world's first international football tournament and between 1883 and 1984, home nation pride was up for grabs on 89 occasions, with only war in Germany and civil unrest in Ireland stopping the event taking place.

Please also see the article British Home Championship - to see that it is quite clearly Ireland that is one of the Home Nations before 1921/1922.

zoney ♣ talk 18:42, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

I have seen the British Home Championship article as I created and wrote most of it. And, as you can see by the article, it was called the British Home Championship - the term 'Home Nations' was not part of the title. The 'Home' bit referred to the four football associations who organised it all being based at 'home' - the UK. It was often unofficially called the Home Nations Championship (or various variations of such), but, again, I have no idea when that nickname was introduced.

Anyway, I'm not saying that the term Home Nations wasn't in use when all of Ireland was part of the UK. As I've mentioned before, it could well have been in use when only England and Wales were in union. The point is, it is a term to describe the four parts of the United Kingdom, not the four parts of the British Isles (which, as you know, mean different things).

I am not ignorant of Ireland's history as part of the UK, but I know the contemporary use of the term includes only Northern Ireland and the article should reflect that.

Nevertheless, rather than just revert the article, I have re-written part of it to highlight Ireland's history as a Home Nation, but not emphasise it above the current correct usage. - Green Tentacle 19:32, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Edit wars

Rather than simply deciding what should or should not be on this page unilaterally. Perhaps it might be an idea to discuss it.

a) the similar terms IMO should be there so that people who were mistakenly looking for Home Counties can understand that this is not the same as Home nations. b) the rugby union section should be there in full. It is not sufficient to say that Home nations compete for the Triple Crown. It is true but they also compete take part in the B&I Lions and host Grand Slam tours. 'Home nations' is an utterly obscure and archaic term little used outside sport. There's no particular point in having a seperate article without mentioning the sport fully.GordyB 11:53, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

GordyB. I also find the Home counties etc. bits not really relevant and would be happy to see them go. Don't feel that strongly, but I don't think that they add much. PaddyBriggs 16:30, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

They don't add a great deal, but I think there should be at least a 'see also'. You and I know the difference between 'Home nations' and 'Home counties' but users of Wikipedia aren't necessarily from Britain / Ireland or may not have English as their first language. To them these terms are indeed similar and may cause confusion.GordyB 14:19, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, and done! PaddyBriggs 14:59, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

More edit wars. Please don't simply delete other people's work without giving a reason. Some of the new version IMO is worth keeping, especially with regard to the dictionary reference and the other sports that use the term 'Home nations'. I agree that political uses of this term are extremely rare but you cannot simply delete those sections without a discussion.GordyB 20:59, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Also I think 'British Isles' is better avoided, it is far from a neutral term.GordyB 21:00, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

I have checked carefully and cannot find a reference to the term in any reference book or by using a search engine other than in a sporting context. New User

I've moved your comment from the top of the page to the bottom otherwise continuity would be entirely lost. I agree that I have not heard the term used outside of sport. I think the point is that it may have been used in a non-sporting context in the past. Home for example is used as being opposite to abroad i.e. the Empire and it is also used in 'Home Office' and 'Home Secretary' for example. Would those who feel that these sections should not be deleted please justify their inclusion?GordyB 15:03, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

I've done it myself this pdf on UK citizenship clearly uses the term 'Home nation' in a geographic sense (top paragraph page 4). Not a political sense though as although it being a UK conference the RoI was also represented.GordyB 15:32, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Cornwall not part of the UK?

The second paragraph appears to say that there is some debate over whether Cornwall is part of the UK. Surely this is not what was intended? TharkunColl 07:02, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

You're right. I've reworded it. - Green Tentacle 21:49, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

The obscure Cornish issue

Whether or not other encyclopedias feel the need to discuss the Cornish issue is not the point. The point is that under the 'googleability' test, it gets enough hits to justify its inclusion.

It may be a minority opinion (probably even in Cornwall) but it is not all that obscure.GordyB 12:08, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

You could say the same about any regionalist group. Vote to take out Cornish irrelevance. There may be an issue which should be represented in wikipedia, but this is not the platform to display it. --Dumbo1 01:38, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

You could not say the same of any other regionalist group in England. No other county has any significant nationalist movement.GordyB 14:10, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Examples

I can't remember hearing this used (I'm British). Are there any actual examples you can point us to, where it's been used? WikiUser 20:51, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

It's usage is pretty rare and the term is a little old fashioned, so it's getting rarer. It's meaning is quite specific (refering to all four nations of the UK collectively, but as separate entities). Like the article says, sport is where the term is mostly used (as England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland often compete separately). Therefore a football highlights programme could say that it was going to say that they would be showing highlights from all the Home Nations' matches. Of course, 'Home Nations' could easily be replaced by 'British teams' or 'UK teams' and those phrases have been prefered in recent years. Here are some examples of the term in use (one sporting, one not):

• Home Nations Agree Dates
• Devolution and Regionalism in the UK

81.174.247.96 13:44, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

A google search for site:news.bbc.co.uk "home nations" results in 1,880 results. You have to search through to the 60th result till you find one that doesn't directly relate to sports. Of the first 100 results, only four do not relate to sports. AlistairMcMillan 22:34, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

As far is I know there is just one national skiing association for the UK, which includes England, Scottland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Therefore it wouldn't make sense to use the term Homeland Nations in skiing. --131.130.1.143 17:58, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I've heard the term a few times before (I'm a New Zealander.) If you arrange them in a certain order, it makes the acronym "wise." Scott Gall 18:14, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Here's some news for you: arranging England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales does not make you wise! --Mal 08:29, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Explanation of reverting

I reverted User:Mais oui!'s edit with the explanation that it was 'complicated and added POV'. Mais oui! then reverted back and accused me of vandalism (which is certainly lying and could be considered a personal attack). I'm reverting the changes back again and will explain them in full here:

• Changed 'constituent countries' back to 'constituent parts' as that is the official term used by the UK government; furthermore, the constituent countries article makes it clear that they do not include Northern Ireland and is not therefore a synomnym for 'Home Nations'
• 'Its usage is rare outside the UK' changed back to 'its usage is rare (especially outside the UK)' as the term is also fairly rare within the UK (this has been discussed before)
• 'Nation' changed back to 'part' in the Cornwall section to avoid using the word 'nation' twice in the same sentence
• 'Country or nation' has been changed back to 'nation' in the Northern Ireland section - the article is talking about nations and not countries; half the point of the term 'Home Nations' is that it doesn't describe Northern Ireland as 'country', but as a 'nation'
• 'Probably inaccurate' has been changed back to 'perhaps inaccurate' - 'perhaps' is a much more neutral word and therefore does not introduce POV

- Green Tentacle 18:46, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

On the contrary, the Constituent country article makes it clear that Northern Ireland is indeed regarded as a constituent country. --Mal 08:37, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

"unofficial"

Irrelevant. Most geographical terms in the UK and Ireland are unofficial in the sense of not having any legal backing. The question is who uses the term; the answer is that it is used not only by the press but also by the BBC and other appendages of state such as the various sports bodies. I think we're getting worringly close to a 3RR here, which would be bloody stupid. EdC 20:15, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

The term 'constituent countries' is official, the fact that home nations is not an official term is one of the key differences between the two terms.GordyB 09:57, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

How is it official? Do you have a reference for this? EdC 12:52, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Home Nations is not a political descriptor

My revision to the entry says:

"Home Nations is a colloquial term sometimes used to refer collectively to the four constituent parts of the United Kingdom (England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland) or to all the self-governing nations or states of the British Isles. It is not a political term (e.g. one that signifies or implies governance of territory) and its usage is rare (especially outside the UK)."

Concise, accurate, uncontentious. Leave it alone please. PaddyBriggs 09:37, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but Home Nations is a political term, though an out-of-favour one. There are links on this page to the term being used in UK government documents. Saying it is all of the British Isles is innacurrate because it isn't! 'Home' refers to the UK. The Republic of Ireland would certainly never describe itself as a Home Nation. The article already covers the fact that sometimes (especially in sports) the term is misunderstood, but, vitally, points out that this is a misunderstanding, not an alternative meaning (well, at least it did before half the content was removed). Moreover, you're definition says it can refer to 'all the self-governing nations or states of the British Isles'. Seeing as Northern Ireland is not self-governing, that makes the definition even more wrong.

Furthermore, Wikipedia is not paper, so there's no need to be concise, especially when it is to the point of being misleading.

So it's not concise (it's misleading), it's not accurate (it's plain wrong) and it's certainly not uncontentious. - Green Tentacle 19:55, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

I was going to change it back after writing this comment, but somebody seems to have beaten me to it. - Green Tentacle 19:58, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

The Republic of Ireland may not describe itself this way but then the UK does not describe itself this way either. The IRFU uses the term 'Home nation' on its webpage to describe its team and RTE also uses this term for the rugby union team. I suspect that the term is not much used by anybody outside sport.GordyB 22:53, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes it is a political descriptor. All the countries concerned have either been conquered by England, or come within the political orbit of London at some point. --MacRusgail 19:06, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

On that basis Iberia is a political term.GordyB 19:11, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

"nations" of the British Isles

POV issue again. I think removing the inverted commas implies that England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland definitely are nations and everybody agrees with this. Celt and English nationalists would agree with this view, but British unionists would not. In their view (probably a minority these days) England, Scotland, Wales and probably Northern Ireland are regions and 'the nation' is the UK or GB.

Another problem is that the idea of Ireland as a nation is not universally accepted either. Irish nationalists would certainly see it this way, but Northern Irish unionists don't necessarily agree.

I also think 'British Isles' is too controversial a term to be useful.

I have reverted the deletion of the inverted commas around nations to show that this is something that not everybody agrees about and deleted the reference to British Isles.GordyB 12:38, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

There are tens of thousands of references confirming that England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland are nations. --Mais oui! 19:56, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

There are just as many that say that they are not. I'm trying to keep this article as NPOV as possible. Most these days would say that E, S, W and I are nations but this is not a universally held opinion and the article should not imply that it is. I'm not wedded to the inverted commas and if you can find an alternative wording then that's fine by me.GordyB 20:00, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I have given up long ago trying to get some sense into this entry, but for what it's worth I have researched the term "Home Nations" extensively and have found virtually no substantive reference to the term except in a sporting context. It is certainly not a political term and it never has been. The word Nation is often used to refer to a sporting team and therefore I agree with Mais oui! that England, Wales, Ireland and Scotland are nations in the sporting context to which Home Nations refers (IMHO). They are nations in other contexts as well, of course, but there is understandable contention over a divided Ireland's status. In a sporting context Ireand is (sometimes) two "Nations" (Association Football), sometimes not (Rugby Union). If we keep politics out of this entry then the problem goes away. And politics should be kept out of the entry for the reason in my first sentence above! PaddyBriggs 11:54, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

The vast majority of references to home nation are for sports purposes. I don't have any objection to a wording that states that E, S, W and I are nations in the sporting sense. They are not nation states in the political sense i.e. an independent England, Scotland or Wales does not exist, an Ireland does but it is not a 32 county Ireland. Perhaps a different wording is a possibility.GordyB 12:30, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I've had a go but the article really needs a synonym for 'collectively', it's been used twice and jars.GordyB 13:26, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Would a simple 'together' do the job? - Green Tentacle 22:25, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. The best solutions are always the simplest.GordyB 15:12, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Ireland is certainly a nation, whether England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are nations may be debatable. I feel that they are with the exception of Northern Ireland which is a region of the UK. The term British Isles should be deleted, as it is far to controversial Iolar Iontach 19:34, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Whether it is the island of Ireland or the Republic of Ireland which is a 'nation' is highly debateable, it is also extremely debateable whether given E, S and W as nations why NI could not be considered in the same way. If Britain is a 'federation' of E, W and S then it makes no sense for NI to be a region - it is neither part of E, W or S. Anyway this is precisely the sort of debate that I am trying to keep off the page. This has been analysed in depth in other places and a further analysis of it here would be disproportionate.GordyB 13:18, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Perhapse the use of the term "British Isles (IONA)" would be acceptatble to indicate that it is a geographic not a political description. --Philip Baird Shearer 17:36, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

"British Isles" is no longer in the article and I can't see the need to add it back in.GordyB 19:53, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Common usage

I want to turn the first paragraph on its head. I think that the sporting use of the term "Home Nations" should come first, with an explanation that the term has different meanings: when as with rugby when the sporting body represents the island of Ireland, the term means teams representing England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales,(see All Blacks Name Tour Squad and The World Stage descends on Ireland Page 11) but for sports that are organised with two different sporting body representing the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland, the term usually refers to England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales (see Thompson steps into Fifa role as home nations ditch McBeth). Occasionally the term Home Nations is used by the British government as a simile for constituent countries of the United Kingdom when it always means England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales (eg "Landmark Agreement Heralds Closer Cultural Cooperation Between Home Nations").

This article by the FAI is interesting because it uses the term home nations to mean the bodies that represented soccer in the United Kingdom before the Free State came into existence and describes the struggle of soccer played under the auspices of the Football Association of the Irish Free State to gain international recognition. But then again the term home nations can still be used to include the republic's soccer team as this article makes clear.

There is also the usage as expressed here where it is used to refer to any nation to which a person belongs. --Philip Baird Shearer 11:12, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Recent edit wars

I have several issues with recent versions of this page

1. Firstly rugby union should not be referred to as an unqualified "rugby" as many people (including me) call rugby league "rugby". This is an agreed policy of the rugby union Wikiproject.
2. Similarly "football" is an ambiguous term for many people, soccer is considered slang in the UK; the best term to use is Association football which is the new name for the old Football (soccer) article.
3. Using figures for small numbers is bad style, "four" is better style than "4".
4. I also think it a mistake to replace England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland with "the 4 countries of the UK" or similar. People reading the article aren't necessarily aware of what this refers to, spelling it out clearly also allows for links to the respective articles.
5. It's also not massively relevant as to the exact coverage that British media give to rugby union teams from the Republic of Ireland. This is not an article on the British media, it is enough to note that they do give coverage to Munster Rugby etc in a way that they would not give a French or Italian team.GordyB (talk) 09:55, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

While I agree with most of what you say, that doesn't justify you in reverting the whole of my rewrite of the section "Sporting Events" without any explanation. I have restored my rewrite -- if you don't like it, discuss it here. Jimmy Pitt (talk) 11:37, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I reverted back to the last version before the current edit warring started.GordyB (talk) 23:37, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Then you should take more care with your reverts. You reverted completely reasonable edits of mine and I don't want to see it happen again. Jimmy Pitt (talk) 23:54, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

With respect, I think you are forgetting that there is a policy of no article ownership within Wikipedia. If you don't like your edits being altered by other editors then you are better off finding a new past-time. I reverted to the last version before any edit wars began so that any recent changes could be discussed rather reverted all the time. Without looking at the history log, I am fairly sure that at least one person (and probably more) is in breach of the three revert rule.GordyB (talk) 00:08, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

With respect, no, I haven't forgotten the policy about "no article ownership". But I made reasonable good faith edits to one entire section, which -- with the exception of one word (soccer or football) -- I don't believe Beckford or anybody else had a problem with. You, however, clearly did, because you came bulldozing in and undid the entire effort, without a word of explanation. And then you have the gall to lecture me on Wikipedia's policy. You didn't "alter" my edits, you erased them and all your bluster doesn't hide the fact that you reverted without due care. Jimmy Pitt (talk) 01:11, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

You are taking this about a billion times too seriously.09:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by GordyB (talk

I think you should go with the local usage, which in this case, is football. Petepetepetepete (talk) 11:06, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Not in Ireland, it is not which is a home nation (according to the article) - see Football (word). In addition it is best to chose terms which are acceptable in both US and UK English (as well as other varieties).GordyB (talk) 23:37, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

map

As Ireland as a whole is called a "Home Nation", it should be marked as a whole on the map. Northern Ireland isn't really regarded by anyone as a nation! Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 02:29, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

It is regarded as such by the UK government who give it "constitutional country" status alongside England, Scotland and Wales.

I agree with you about the map though, it would be nice to have a map that showed other places that are mentioned in the text e.g. Channel Islands, Isle of Man, Republic of Ireland and Cornwall within England.GordyB (talk) 08:55, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

The UK government does not regard Northern Ireland as a "nation". Not sure who does. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 09:43, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

What is a constituent country if not a nation? Northern Ireland had its own parliament long before Scotland and Wales.GordyB (talk) 17:21, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Merge into Constituent country

• Oppose - constituent country and home nation are two different things.GordyB (talk) 11:25, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I've removed the template. It and others were added whilst the terms the articles describe are part of an ongoing mediation attempt. To have them opened now would be prejudicial, and I think it best to delay any discussion until the mediation attempts are resolved.  DDStretch  (talk) 11:31, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Having looked at the talk page of the subdivisions of the UK, I think you are right. It would be much less complicated to solve the issues of subdivisions of the UK versus constitutnet countries before discussing this article's relationship to either article or to a merged article.GordyB (talk) 11:38, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Merge into Subdivisions of the United Kingdom

• Support --fone4me 11:33, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
• Support --uk4ever 17:44, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
• As above I think that there should be no voting until the other two articles are sorted out.GordyB (talk) 21:51, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Ulster (Northern Ireland) is a nation.

Ulster (or 'Northern Ireland') is a nation. Between 1921 & 1972, it was the only one of the 4 British nations to have its own Parliament. It was self-governing like a Dominion to a certain degree. Legislation passed by the British Parliament in London had no force in Ulster, unless it was extended to Ulster with the consent of the Ulster Parliament, which passed a Bill to extend Imperial legislation. - (Aidan Work 01:46, 29 December 2005 (UTC))

A state is not necessarily a nation. An antithesis is that the Kurdish nation is split across Turkey, Iraq and Iran, yet the Kurds are members of those states. The Irish nation is similarly split across two jurisdictions (ignoring the Republic's extra-territorial claims that existed before the Belfast agreement). Prior to partition, regardless of how British the Irish were or weren't - they were all quite simply Irish.

The concept of Northern Ireland is a nation is not widely embraced - hence why most in the North will describe themselves as Irish or British (rather than "Northern Irish"). The area covered isn't even the north of Ireland - it's the northeast. And it only covers the majority of Ulster - not the whole of it (even if one considers some parts of the three Ulster counties in the Republic to be more Connaught or Leinster historically - the most part of those counties have always definitively in Ulster)!

Bringing in Ulster-Scots into the equation - historically that is most attached only to the east of what is now Northern Ireland.

Northern Ireland has no proper identity that is actually linked with the state - despite it's most close links within the Union over recent centuries. It is an arbitrary boundary drawn by the British to avoid all out havoc (more than there was) after independance for most of the island.

zoney ♣ talk 21:32, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

If 'Ulster' is a nation, I'd like to declare my back garden a 'nation'. Having said that, considering a clear majority of the population of Ulster favours Irish reunification, I suspect the earlier poster was trying to be humourous. 193.203.136.185 (talk) 18:16, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Republic of Ireland

Just because the official name is Ireland does not mean that this is the name that ought to be used. The UK's official name is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland but do you see that written anywhere?

Greece is officially the Hellenic Republic but you won't find that anywhere either. It is Wikipedia's policy to refer to the Republic of Ireland as "the Republic of Ireland" not "Ireland" which is reserved for the island and for pre-partition Ireland. "Ireland" is also the official (and only) name for the island of Ireland.

If you don't like the Wikipedia policy then try to get it changed but don't continually change this article by incorporating something which is not the agreed policy.GordyB (talk) 19:37, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

The United Kingdom is often used (without the additions) so that really is not a good example. Wikipedia uses Ireland by the way --Snowded TALK 19:54, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

The United Kingdom is used but that's the common form of the country's name not the actual, legal name.

Wikipedia allows the [[Republic of Ireland|Ireland]] link but that is suggested for places in the ROI. Where there is ambiguity we use "Republic of Ireland" for the South and "Ireland" for the whole island.

The usage here is particularly confusing when we are talking issues that effect the whole island. How is any reader supposed to know that "Ireland" sometimes means the whole island and sometimes 3/4s of the island?

I would suggest a compromise wording only I can't think of one (and state of Ireland is nonsense).GordyB (talk) 20:10, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Well the only real current use is Rugby where it is the island (hence my earlier change). The ROI/Ireland debate is a continuous contentious item and we really don't want it spilling over to this page. --Snowded TALK 20:38, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Which is why I would prefer that we wait until a decision has been made elsewhere rather than have a decision made on each and every page whether ROI or Ireland is to be prefered on that particular page. The problem with saying "it's only rugby" is that a) how does anybody know that unless they are already an expert on Irish sport b) this isn't true as very many sports are all-Ireland not just rugby (which is itself a disputed term btw).GordyB (talk) 20:45, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Agree it should wait and the pipeline seems the least controversial form. We could leave the historic stuff and simply say that for Rugby the team represents Ireland as a whole (given the context that would make sense) --Snowded TALK 20:54, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

In the second paragraph is it really necessary to state that the Republic of Ireland is a separate country from the UK? Surely this is obvious? Christopher White 1982 (talk) 16:12, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Merger proposal

This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Home nations and Countries of the United Kingdom seem to cover almost entirely the same information - both are about England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland, and their place within the United Kingdom. They also use the same main picture (File:United Kingdom labelled map7.png). YeshuaDavid (talk) 21:56, 30 May 2009 (UTC) Support. --59.182.40.169 (talk) 17:01, 19 June 2009 (UTC) Might be a bit late here to start supporting, but I also support.MITH 17:14, 19 June 2009 (UTC) Oppose - Ireland in its entirity is often considered a "home nation" but only Northern Ireland is part of the UK.GordyB (talk) 18:35, 19 June 2009 (UTC) I think a combined article could make the distinctions clear, so as not to confuse readers. YeshuaDavid • Talk • 21:48, 19 June 2009 (UTC) There are enough problems with Irish nationalists altering references to "home nations" so as to exclude Ireland without making the problem worse by having [[Countries of the United Kingdom|Home nations]] tags.GordyB (talk) 22:00, 19 June 2009 (UTC) That would obviously be undesirable. I would suggest we merge and make "Home Nations" the target page, rather than "Countries of the United Kingdom". YeshuaDavid • Talk • 22:11, 19 June 2009 (UTC) Wooooh god that would be even more ugly, alot of people feel very strongly about the title being "countries" of the UK. I did originally think merging the article was a good idea but now i think its safer to leave the two separate articles, whilst this article will remain pretty small it does justify ts own article as its a regulary used term and is just about sports where as the countries of the UK is far more about the political makeup of the United Kingdom. BritishWatcher (talk) 22:19, 19 June 2009 (UTC) Do they? Could you provide sources for your claim that alot of people feel very strongly about the title being "countries" of the UK. YeshuaDavid • Talk • 22:34, 19 June 2009 (UTC) The talk page at Countries of the United Kingdom, its been quiet and stable for several months now but seeking a merger would reopen the previous arguments. We also have stable introductions at England, Scotland , Wales and Northern Ireland where all of them say *** is a country that is part of the United Kingdom linking to that article. If someone tried to change the link on the Scotland artcle from Countries of the UK to Home nations it will turn messy. GordyB mentioned Irish nationalists, well theres alot of Welsh and Scottish ones about too. If a merger was to take place, home natons would have to just become a section on the Countries of the UK page. BritishWatcher (talk) 22:41, 19 June 2009 (UTC) How about merging both articles, and calling the combined article "Countries of Great Britain and Ireland". Great Britain and Ireland is a fairly neutral term in the British Isles naming dispute, and I can't see any editors being particuarly by that formulation. I see you reasons for not merging, but the two articles do seem to cover the same ground. Political and sporting dimesnsions could easily be covered in one article. YeshuaDavid • Talk • 22:57, 19 June 2009 (UTC) I understand the reasons for wanting the merger, im not totally opposed to one happening but as i said before it would have to be just creating a new section on the Countries of the United Kingdom article because attempting to change that title is just not worth the bloodshed it will unleash. Countries of the UK is a neat phrase which makes all sides happy, it ensures England,Scotland,Wales and Northern Ireland are called countries as the government does at the same time as clearly pointing out they are part of the United Kingdom. You could try asking how people would feel about a change to the title and a merger on the country article but i cant see it gettng support. BritishWatcher (talk) 23:10, 19 June 2009 (UTC) If you can have "Countries of Great Britain and Ireland" then some will ask why it is not "Countries of Great Britain, Ireland and Denmark". To those who are sensitive to these things the article will have an automatic overture of British unionism because you are implying a relationship between Britain and Ireland that doesn't exist between Britain and say Denmark.GordyB (talk) 23:15, 19 June 2009 (UTC) Very good point, a war has only just ended on Military history of Britain, which had been called Military history of the peoples of the British Isles for about 8 months but was unacceptable to the Irish who hate being linked with Britain in such a way. Changing it to "Mlitary history of Britain and Ireland" was one of the suggestions but it didnt get support. BritishWatcher (talk) 23:23, 19 June 2009 (UTC) I see both your points for not merging. However, I don't agree that the phrase "Great Britain and Ireland" equates to unionism; Great Britain and Ireland are two different islands, inhabited by two sovereign states. Denmark is an entirely seperate country, with no territory over parts of Great Britain or Ireland. I'll remove the merge request though, as I can see this leading to needless disagreement. YeshuaDavid • Talk • 23:38, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Ireland

There was a previous stable version of the wording which seems to have deleted by somebody. I suggest we find it and revert to it. There is no need to bring in more politics than is necessary. "Current state" implies that borders are about to change which isn't remotely likely; the borders have stayed the same since 1922; that's rather more than "current".GordyB (talk) 13:38, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Republic of Ireland is fine in the context it is being used here. We need to be sensible. The rigmarole you reverted here is unnecessary and OTT.

You may be interested in this MOS guidelines, which has ArbCom endorsement. --RA (talk) 14:04, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks RA, but RoI is not fine in the context it is being used. Specifically, and in accordance with the MOS guidelines, where the state form a major component of the topic, we should use [[Republic of Ireland|Ireland]] . I chose not to use this form in this case because the sentence also refers to Northern Ireland and the MOS guidelines state "except where the island of Ireland or Northern Ireland is being discussed in the same context or where confusion may arise". But the article isn't actually differentianting between NI and RoI as in the examples, and instead summarizes the political history of the names of the Irish states, and finishes up by incorrectly stating (later "Republic of Ireland") which suggests it is the name of the state. It is not being used to disambiguate from Northern Ireland in this context. This is wrong, and not supported by the MOS or the Arbcom ruling. INMO, the simplest way to end this would be to drop the entire "historical political" angle. Is is unnecessary detail and irrelevant to the piece. (I'm also not sure why that section is entitled "events" - are these political events relevant?).

I suggest that the paragraph is changed to simply mention that "Home Nations" is still sometimes used in rugby union where an entire-island Irish team competes. Or in this case, to correctly use the "Northern Ireland" "Republic of Ireland" disambiguation in a sentence structure. --HighKing (talk) 17:00, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Other Sports

What sports use "Home Nations" to refer to an all-island Ireland team, along with England, Wales and Scotland? --HighKing (talk) 11:53, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

A search of Google news turned up rugby (example) and, surprisingly I thought, swimming too as recent references to (all) Ireland being a one of the home nations. --RA (talk) 12:08, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

It's used quite a bit in Rugby. The Swim Ireland website uses a different context - With the beginning of the Six Nations Rugby Tournament, rivalry between the UK Home Countries and Ireland is at fever pitch and this guide refers only to UK and British. I also found this article on polo using "home countries", but then the "Home Nations Cup" appears to be England, Scotland and Wales. This, as expected, is not going to be straight forward... --HighKing (talk) 13:30, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Problems in the lead

"which together form the United Kingdom. Historically the term included all of Ireland, which until 1922 was wholly a part of the United Kingdom, and Ireland is still sometimes included in sporting contexts."

This is just not true. First one would have to address the question of whether 6 out of 9 counties of the Province of Ulster could be called a nation. The second point is many as sports in Ireland play as Ireland, it is disingenuous to say that Home Nation equate with the political entity that is the UK and only that Ireland is "still sometimes included in sporting contexts". Ireland is always included in rugby union as a Home Nation or is it more politically correct to say that England, Scotland and Wales are still included in Rugby as Home Nations? -- PBS (talk) 11:55, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

A better approach would be to explain that the term does not have a precise meaning and that it alters depending on context. If a British politicians uses the term in the context of local government then they mean the constituent countries of the UK, but if it is used in the context of rugby union then it mean teams representing England, Scotland, Wales and a team representing the Island of Ireland. -- PBS (talk) 12:08, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Historic nature

I am happy to be proved wrong, but as far as I am aware the term is an historic one and is not current. Certainly in Rugby you won't see it in any official documents. The odd use in the BBC is a residual reference at best. --Snowded ^TALK 22:08, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

It is not just the BBC, it can be found in other places too, including the Irish media. The fact that the Triple Crown and the Grand Slam tour exist means that "Home Nations" will get the occasional mention.GordyB (talk) 22:14, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Home nations is certainly still used for sport, even if it is not officially by sporting bodies. The current wording is totally justified. BritishWatcher (talk) 22:17, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

A few uses of Home Nations this year. [2] [3] [4] [5] BritishWatcher (talk) 22:27, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

I believe it is most commonly used by the media especially when referring to Rugby. I don't believe it is used outside this context. --HighKing (talk) 00:17, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

It is and as I said in the previous section, a better method of dealing with would be to recast the lead to explain that depending on context it meaning varies. For example in a UK political context it never includes the Republic,[6] in the context of sports such as Association football and the Olympics where two affiliated sports councils representing Ireland then it means those teams representing Britain and Northern Ireland.[7][8] But for sports such as Rugby Union were there is one sports council representing the island of Ireland then it means Britain and Ireland. -- PBS (talk) 03:28, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

The examples give above are all casual reports (including one blog) there are no official uses mentioned. Sorry BW they simply do not support your statement. If you can find any current reference in an official sporting body then that would have validity. At the moment the citations only show that it is used occasionally. At the moment the wording implies that is has some official status which is does not. If we are going to mention it then it needs the full context explained. --Snowded ^TALK 08:58, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Since when did a term need official status or to be used by official sporting bodies to be considered "used". I do not think anyone is claiming that and nor does the article, if it does then a rewording is required. BritishWatcher (talk) 09:13, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Snowded did you see the 2009/2010 parliamentary briefing paper I listed, surly it is neither "casual" or historic. -- PBS (talk) 09:47, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Hardly official though, but it does demonstrate that the term is still occasionally used - although arguably this example could still be one of those casual uses.... I think the point that Snowded is making is still valid - that the term appears to have fallen out of usage in all official capacities, and survives as a (possibly) quaint term (outside of Rugby). --HighKing (talk) 10:20, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

I do not have a problem with the introduction saying it is not used officially but the idea that the article can not say the term is "used" because it has no "official use" can not be right. BritishWatcher (talk) 10:24, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

The British Olympics site (which I also listed above) allows a search and "home nations" returns a number of pages eg British Olympic Medical Institute "this service is available to UK world class funded athletes from both summer and winter sports, across all the home nations." or from the same search Our Vision for the BOA Background section (second page) "Home Nations Sports Council". James Mortimer in an article dated 5/04/2010, A look at the All Blacks touring Grand Slams on the official All Blacks web site uses home nations as a shorthand for "England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales". Also here is an English FA page: "Ideally we would like to work with the other Home Nations but even if they decide not to take part our commitment is unchanged". (Possible Team GB? English Football Association) -- PBS (talk) 10:36, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

A Googke search of ["home nations" site:gov.uk] returns over 6k or results from all corners of the UK. Many, but not all, are to do with sports, and some are to do with the home nations of non UK immigrants (which of course means foreign nations), but others are to do with different aspects of the Home Nations. Some give definitions, but the phrase is so common in the UK that many authors of the papers expect their readers to know what the phrase "Home Nations" means. -- PBS (talk) 11:14, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

As far as I can see any official use relates to everything excluding ROI. The All Blacks site says the four ORIGINAL Home Nations (not the qualification. Look guys I have always agreed the term is around but the references do not support the proposed wording. I do find it interesting that BW has rejected the use of Home Nations as an historical alternative to British Isles, but I note that in passing. The article needs to make it clear what the term meant historically and what it means now. --Snowded ^TALK 12:20, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

I take it then that you agree that the term is still used "officially" and is not historic. I suspect that it was never used "officially" but was a useful shorthand for describing the empire, just as "home counties" is used to describe the count2ies nearest London. BTW I think your reading of the All Blacks article is too legalistic. It is clear from the context of the use of the term is still current. As I said in the last section, a better approach in the lead would be to explain that home nations does not have one precise meaning, and that it alters depending on context. If a British politicians uses the term in the context of local government then they mean the constituent countries of the UK, but if it is used in the context of rugby union then it mean teams representing England, Scotland, Wales and a team representing the Island of Ireland. -- PBS (talk) 21:24, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

I agree that you can find uses of it on official sites, but only in respect of E,W,S and NI not the historical meaning and use. I disagree on the All Blacks and I haven't see "Home Nations" used in the context of Rugby in well over a decade other than the odd casual reference. The All Blacks references back to the historical or original use, its very clear and its not legalistic to point it out. The words that I reversed were implying that the historical term is still current which is inaccurate. --Snowded ^TALK 21:30, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't understand what you mean by official use. When was it ever used as an official term? I simply found some "official" sites (whatever that it mean to mean) a term is used, that does not mean it was or ever was an "official" term.

The term is still in use depending on context either to describe to constituent parts of the UK or the nations of the archiepiscopal. You removed "Because of historical political differences between rugby union and association football in Ireland, in the Irish rugby team continues to be part of the Home Nations whereas the Republic of Ireland football team does not." and replaced it with "The term is sometimes used in reference to sporting events where the countries of the United Kingdom compete against each other." but clearly usage an understanding is that for sports such as Rugby Union that are played with one governing body in Ireland home nations means Ireland not Northern Ireland.

A search of http://www.rbs6nations.com (the official site of the six nations competition as some seem to wish the usage to be restricted to official sites although usually we use reliable sources (including the BBC and newspapers)) has lots of articles which include the term home nations. Take this one "RBS extend 6 Nations sponsorship (2006)" as an example "Despite the Triple Crown's history there has never previously been a permanent memento for either England, Scotland, Wales or Ireland if they beat the other three home nations during the championship". Let us suppose that an American is reading this page and is puzzled by the term "Home Nations" so looks it up using Google. Google of course returns this page as the first one. Now of the two sentences "Because of historical ..." and "The term is sometimes used in reference ..." which is the more accurate? With the current wording "The term is sometime ..." does the American conclude that Wikipedia is wrong or that Ireland is part of the UK? -- PBS (talk) 23:44, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

A search at rbs6nations for "home nations" returns about 130 results, out of a total of over 12,000 articles, so a little more than 1%. I believe Snowded is raising a valid point in that while it appears that the term is used occasionally in Rugby, it also appears to qualify as a casual reference. --HighKing (talk) 09:52, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Fact remains that clear evidence has been shown that the term is still in use. That is what this whole debate has been about. It is time for that fact tag next to the word "used" to be removed. BritishWatcher (talk) 10:13, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

And Snowded hasn't stated that it is not in use. The argument is that usage does not reflect historic meaning with the exception perhaps of Rugby, where the term may still be used on occasion. This is a clearer and more accurate reflection than the current lede. --HighKing (talk) 10:30, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Interestingly the reference above talks about the Home Unions which used from time to time. Lets try and move this forward, I think we need the following:

• The lede needs to state that Home Nations was a sporting term applied to England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland.
• From 1921 onwards it has been used (examples) to England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, but the original mean still appears from time to time (WP:WEIGHT applies here) were all Ireland teams exist
• Home counties means something different (but that is just a note surely)

--Snowded ^TALK 10:33, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

The earliest book reference I could find for "home nations" using Google Books was this one from 1889, so it my not have originated as a sporting term, and we can see from the search of site:gov.uk it is not exclusively used as a sporting term. I don't think it is a matter of weight, it is a matter of context in regards to rugby, football (and other sports) and UK politics. I don't think home counties comes into it unless someone can find a references explains why the two expressions are used (the OED puts the first usage of "home counties" as 1898 .. a coincidence I guess). The first OED reference for a Home Department is 1797. -- PBS (talk) 11:50, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Hmmmm. It's deffo historical as regards Association Football. We find the term is still used for Rugby (occasional). This usage relates to EISW (Eng, Ire, Sco, Wal). Historically, it was used in a political context to refer to the 4 countries of the UKoGB&I, but today can be used to refer to the parts making up the UKoGB&NI. We can find refs for all of this I believe. --HighKing (talk) 12:29, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

If it is de-facto historical as regards the FA, then how do we explain the FA web page about the Olympics in 2010? There may not be a home nations soccer tournament any more, but that does not mean that the home nations FAs will not use the term as a short hand for the constituent nations of the UK that they will not use it. You say "still used for Rugby (occasional)" is there any indication that it was ever used more frequently than it is today, how does one objectively judge frequency of use (weasel words and all that)? -- PBS (talk) 22:39, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Good points - I really hadn't picked up on the fact that the FA still use the term, and searching their website turns it up a fair bit although they use it in the full glory of every possible meaning :-) Sometimes its the 4 home nations of the UK, others its the 4 historical home nations with Ireland the island being represented (Paralympics Soccer). But equally noticable is the complete lack of usage at the Wales FA website, the Northern Ireland FA website, and the Scottish FA website. And I also see (on the RoI FA website) that a competition for those with disabilities is known as either the "Four Nations" competition, or the "Home Nations" competition. And it appears that only RoI, NI, Sco and Eng participate. Kinda difficult to pick a standard definition across everywhere - looks to me like the definition is pretty flexible.

And I agree that it's going to be very difficult to qualify "occasional". Unless it's stated as a reference, any research would be subject to claims of being WP:OR. But at least we're scratching our way towards getting a better handle on this term - what it means, who uses it, etc. --HighKing (talk) 16:12, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Extended content

I don't understand what Snowded (talk · contribs)'s problem is because he hasn't explained it properly. He seems to want to introduce roiginal research that these terms are "archaic". Perhaps if he can find a citation for that it should be included. Otherwise it is hard to distinguish archaic from "not really used often, but still with a particular technical meaning".—Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.128.219.103 (talk • contribs) 22:12, 6 July 2010 I'm happy with "not really used often" if it comes to it. But I would be a lot happier if you signed your posts and also told us under what IDs you have previously edited the Wikipedia. Single purpose IPs are too often the bane of articles in this area. --Snowded TALK 22:28, 6 July 2010 (UTC) Lol i still remember when i first arrived on wikipedia, getting a grilling from Snowded demanding my previous life story. :) BritishWatcher (talk) 22:31, 6 July 2010 (UTC) Yep, and I would do it again. There are far too many sock puppets, SPAs and block evaders wasting time on these pages.--Snowded TALK 22:58, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Rugby Union

I propose to remove the paragraph "Ironically, Ireland was originally divided for rugby union, ..." because that division was before the term home nations was in use, and before any international Rugby Union matches had been played. -- PBS (talk) 00:44, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

UK-centricity

I am often disgruntled when I read Wikipedia articles that are quite clearly written by Americans for Americans.

I should think some of our cousins across the pond - or indeed anywhere else outside the UK - might feel similarly regarding this article.

Notwithstanding all the crass rubbish that it seems some contibutors have tried to include or exclude, surely there should be an overiding caveat which means the entire article should start with the words; "In the United Kingdom...".

Don't forget that English speakers from all around the worlds might randomly (or otherwise) be directed to this article.

195.88.237.18 (talk) 16:51, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

It's not solely a UK-term. It's used by media in the ROI and very likely by Australia and New Zealand as well.GordyB (talk) 17:12, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Single governing body for the island of Ireland

In reverting to an earlier lead that does not make certain OR statements (see above) I removed this:

If, as is the norm, a sport has a single governing body for the island of Ireland, as in rugby union, the term retains the original sense of teams representing England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland.

Notes

The problem I have with it is most recognised international sports are played under the auspices of the Olympic Games or would like to be under that umbrella organisation and all those sports are played by teams which are represent either Republic or Great Britain so to say that there is a single all-Ireland team is not a clear cut as that (Ireland at the Olympics, Northern Ireland at the Commonwealth Games). -- PBS (talk) 14:53, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

A collective term principally used in relation to sports

The edit of the lead on 8 January. Put in a definitive statement in the first sentence:

Home Nations is a collective term principally used in relation to sports.

Now it may be true but is is verifiable? -- PBS (talk) 00:42, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

It is verified fairly comprehensively in the rest of the article, with extensive supporting references. Brocach (talk) 11:08, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Unless you have a source that can be used to verify the statement I suggest that we revert to the older lead which does not make that assertion. Using the rest of the article to justify the statement is OR. If you look through the archive you will see that it is also used by British government websites for things other than sporting occasions see this like as an example. So to make the claim without a source to back it up is OR. -- PBS (talk) 08:35, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

It is well over a month since I posted the above, and as there has been no sources presented, I am reverting the lead. -- PBS (talk) 14:27, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Brocach has an edit history of changing articles that give any hint that Northern Ireland is regarded to as a country or a nation in any term, and usually lacks the sources to back up his personal opinion on it. Mabuska ^(talk) 23:20, 7 May 2011 (UTC)