Talk:St Andrews Agreement

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Politics of the United Kingdom

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles

??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

More information:
/
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Northern Ireland

	Northern Ireland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Northern Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Northern 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.Northern IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject Northern IrelandTemplate:WikiProject Northern IrelandNorthern Ireland-related articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Unionism in Ireland (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Unionism in Ireland, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Unionism in IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject Unionism in IrelandTemplate:WikiProject Unionism in IrelandUnionism in Ireland articles

Ireland Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wikipedia asleep on Northern Ireland revolution

For the first time in modern history an agreement has the backing of all sides in Northern Ireland which looks likely to settle the Northern Ireland question permanently. Nobody on Wikipedia has noticed. Why is this? Perhaps peace is less interesting than war.--File Éireann 22:34, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That seems a bit unfair, Wikipedia is not a news service and this article was created within hours of the talks in St. Andrews ending. -- IslaySolomon 07:23, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good news, even when important, is relatively boring to many. This news story, which points to permanent peace in Northern Ireland, seems no less important than the Jyland Mohammed Cartoons controversy, yet few of our Irish contributors seem interested. This is more than a news story, it represents the first time that the DUP have bought into a permanent settlement. It is worthy of much greater attention.--File Éireann 11:55, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, it is, and I'm observing it with a lot of interest from Austria. ;) —Nightst a llion (?) 17:20, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is good news.Perhaps the reason people aren't interested is because it is not bad news.

Trivia?

Does this sentence really deserve inclusion?

"Ian Paisley left St Andrews quickly after attending the Press Conference in order to be with his family for his fiftieth wedding anniversary."

How sweet... but relevant?--Mais oui! 09:51, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I have relegated that sentence to a footnote. Scolaire 14:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Disruption of talks at Stormont by Michael Stone 24/11

I have added a brief summary of the event which took place 24 November 2006 (today), there is more information such as the speculation that Stone will be sent back to prison to serve his life sentence but this has yet to be verified. Angryafghan 20:21, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have made this a footnote as well. Strictly speaking, it is not relevant to the agreement itself, though it probably should be dealt with in History of Northern Ireland. Scolaire 14:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit of 28 November

I have updated the article to reflect the progress of the agreement through the various deadlines.
I have left the "Reaction" section alone, but it is in need of a major re-write. Firstly, only the first three (short) paragraphs are actually "reaction". The remainder is a newspaper-type account of a parliamentary debate. Secondly, it is entirely one-sided — there is no reference to either of the nationalist parties, to the Irish Government or to reaction from abroad (The United States, Europe etc.). I'm not sure the section even needs to be there.
Scolaire 14:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've done the re-write to "Reaction." Not great but I think an improvement. Feel free to edit it / remove it as you see fit. Scolaire 07:31, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sources for the status of Irish in NI after St Andrews Agreement

I have written a line or two in the aricle "[Irish Language]]" about the Irish Language Act discussed these days following the St Andrews Agreement but maybe there is more to be written in this article or in aticles specialised in North Ireland. Because I follow the news considering language policy, but I do not have the time to write something more myself about something I don't know enough, I am listing some links for the issue to be used by someone interested:

a BBC news article [1]
a comprehensive report from the Irish Times [2]
the views of POBAL, the umbrella organisation for the Irish language community in Belfast: 8 principles (they are circulating also a www.petitiononline.com/acht online petition supporting it). Also a lengthy Proposed Legislation - The Irish Language Act NI, published before the agreement.
Sinn Fein's view [3] [4]
SDLP's view [5]
DUP's view [6]

--Michkalas 20:21, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Plan B?

There has been great talk over this 'Plan B', is it something similar to 'Joint Sovereignty' or something like that - the article doesn't make it at all clear. 86.148.34.13 19:49, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neither the British nor the Irish Government has made it clear what 'Plan B' is. It seems to be on the lines of Direct Rule, but with increased involvement by the Republic, rather than joint sovereignty. Scolaire 12:27, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And where does Wogan stand?

It would be nice if the article had a little bit on Terry Wogan's take on the subject. I don't know anything about it but I'm curious. Kinser 20:33, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon? Scolaire 20:54, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Taoiseach

The involvement of the Taoiseach is illegal as Northern Ireland is Part of the UK it has never belonged to Ireland as it was always Northern Ireland and Ulster before that for more than 400+ years.

And what was it before that? Hmm? Sulmac 14:11, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Following that logic, the involvement of the UK and unionists is illegal, as Ireland was stolen from the Irish by the English. This is the kind of crap you would expect to hear from the likes of UVF gangsters, not from rational human beings83.109.90.218 (talk) 06:53, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the Anglo Irish Agreement in the late 80s/early 90s agreed there was an 'Irish dimension' to all discussions on Northern Ireland, hence the inclusion of the Taoiseach and Irish Government. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:BB6:11C7:AD58:6DC2:4546:5719:35E0 (talk) 15:53, 1 November 2020 (UT

)

Irish and Ulster Scots

What is the reason for these agreements to be translated into the local languages? This an english language encyclopedia and the agreement is never referred to in either of the local languages. - 86.42.248.19 (talk) 22:04, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand. You've listened to every conversation in Irish or Ulster Scots since 2006 and you've never heard the agreement referred to? Scolaire (talk) 19:36, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tense

Am I correct in understanding that this agreement is still in place? If so, shouldn't it be in present tense rather than past? Hairy Dude (talk) 18:31, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

dodgy Daily Record link

Greetings, The Daily Record link is now a Questia members-only link. Kind Regards, M.H. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PfPorlock (talk • contribs) 07:31, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]