Jump to content

Talk:Republicanism in the United Kingdom: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
Line 162: Line 162:


The graphical summary has an error I'm uncertain how to fix, so I'll note it here. Where it should say "May 2011" (I think, anyway), it instead says "May 201". [[User:IcePage|IcePage]] ([[User talk:IcePage|talk]]) 03:20, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
The graphical summary has an error I'm uncertain how to fix, so I'll note it here. Where it should say "May 2011" (I think, anyway), it instead says "May 201". [[User:IcePage|IcePage]] ([[User talk:IcePage|talk]]) 03:20, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

== Process of changing from a constitutional monarchy to a republic ==

A section describing the process of changing the United Kingdom from a constitutional monarchy to a republic would be interesting. [[User:John Link|John Link]] ([[User talk:John Link|talk]]) 21:15, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:15, 11 September 2022

Current

Needs to be edited or removed.

"The council has 29 members including Saudi Arabia, Cuba and Sri Lanka." "Syria accused the UK of discriminating against Muslims and Iran complained about the UK's record on tackling sexual discrimination."

None of these lines and others are needed in an article about Republicanism in the UK. For reasons of both giving unnesesary information and being a direct copy of:

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/itn/20080613/tuk-un-should-britain-scrap-royals-dba1618.html

The person who added it in the first place failed even to give this as a source, and when I deleted it stating my reasons (all within wikipedia guidelines: failing to acknowlege sources, direct plagurism etc.) and someone chose to put it back up without attempting to fix any of the problems that it had. If someone wants to correct the problems, then fine, but otherwise I'l just come back and delete it. TJ 1319, 14/06/08

Arguments in favour of a Monarchy - Worrying lack of balance

I admit I'm by no means a skilled Wiki editor, however upon browsing the arguments both for/against I see that whilst the Republican arguments are clean, tidy, & well-cited, the pro-Monarchy are in a poor state: a badly-cited handful. Reviewing the editing history, this essentially happened back in May 2010: review, if you will, the difference between the versions of the 22nd & 23rd of May. I recognise this might spark something of an ideological response, yet surely Wiki has a duty to provide a balanced view of the topic in question? I sincerely doubt this article manages that. 

- MRB 21.09.10

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Republicanism in the United Kingdom. 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:

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) 16:31, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Republicanism in the United Kingdom. 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:

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) 14:45, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Splitting proposed

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion (or rather lack of it) was to perform the split as no objections were raised. Polly Tunnel (talk) 11:43, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I propose that the section Republicanism in the United Kingdom#Advocates of republicanism in the UK (including both "Living" and "Deceased") be split into a separate page containing a stand-alone list called List of advocates of republicanism in the United Kingdom. The content of this section continues to grow and has become overly large in the context of an article that is already fairly long. Polly Tunnel (talk) 15:18, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Opinion polling

Many thanks indeed to the anonymous (?) IP user who has added the “opinion polling” section to this article. A very useful and interesting addition. TrottieTrue (talk) 13:34, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect it was added to show support for the 'Windsors'. Although the monarchy is not beholden to the people, even if 99.9% of the population wanted a republic there is no mechanism to have one. Red Jay (talk) 18:05, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't; if you believe that other polls would show majority support for a United Republic of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, you're free to add them. (And I am not the IP who added the section.) Support for the monarchy as an institution, and for individual members of the Royal Family, tends to wax and wane depending on their actions: the Queen's popularity and support for the monarchy both slumped after the death of Diana, for example. Even if an American works abroad, she is still liable to pay Federal income-tax to the republic: what, in principle, is the difference? 85.67.32.244 (talk) 19:42, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 4 October 2021

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: I withdraw this requested move, I will suggest a different name. Somerby (talk) 16:54, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(non-admin closure)

Republicanism in the United Kingdom → British Republic – Strange to read about the republic United Kingdom. Somerby (talk) 19:38, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 5 October 2021

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved (closed by non-admin page mover) -- Calidum 03:45, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Republicanism in the United Kingdom → British republicanism – Republicans in Britain not only want to change the form of government from monarchy to republic, but also to change the name of the state from kingdom to republic, or rather the English equivalent of this term: Commonwealth. The only (as far as I know) republican bill, Commonwealth of Britain Bill, proposed such a new name for the country: Britain. It was said above that Republicanism in the United Kingdom doesn't necessarily mean a desire to bring about a Commonwealth of Britain, though: there is Republicanism in Northern Ireland, which is largely concerned about a united Irish republic, and only tangentially concerned with how the rest of Great Britain is ruled. There are movements for Welsh independence and Scottish independence. There are supporters for Welsh independence and Scottish independence, some of whom are also Republicans, and some support remaining part of the Commonwealth of Nations with Elizabeth II as the titular head of state. However, there are already articles about these movements: Irish republicanism, Scottish republicanism, Welsh republicanism! And this article is about British republicanism, and such a new title will better reflect the topic of the article. Somerby (talk) 17:18, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"British" includes "Northern Irish", many of whom self-identify as "British" (some quite vehemently), so "British republicanism" would include Northern Irish republicanism: which is more or less an oxyoron. I bought Common Sense (Benn) when it first came out, so am quite familiar with the Commonwealth of Britain Bill, which it reproduces in full. Part of that Bill was that "British jurisdiction over Northern Ireland would be ended", as the article says. There is a whole section in the article (§ Context that discusses, if briefly, republican movements in each of the four nations of the United Kingdom, which have somewhat different aims. There's not really any such thing as a British republican movement in the present day: the article is mostly history.
The article starts: Republicanism in the United Kingdom is the political movement... this to me is erroneous, there is no coherent single ("the") political movement. But then, I get annoyed when politicians patronisingly refer to "the black community", "the LGBT community", or whatever "community" as if all blacks, lesbians, etc were alike; often (it seems to me) to co-opt individuals who probably do not in fact share their views. "There is no such thing as society. There are individuals, and there are families." 85.67.32.244 (talk) 19:23, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you. Republicanism in Northern Ireland is mostly Irish, but also exist Unionists who support a British republicanism. And some even support a Ulster nationalism. Therefore for clarity I think that we have to move this article to British republicanism. --Somerby (talk) 08:03, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was not merged . Heanor (talk) 20:02, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I propose merging Scottish republicanism and Welsh republicanism into Republicanism in the United Kingdom. I think the content in Scottish republicanism and Welsh republicanism can easily be explained in the context of the republicanism in the United Kingdom, and a merger would not cause any article-size or weighting problems in Republicanism in the United Kingdom. --Somerby (talk) 08:50, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A problem with this is the United Kingdom includes Northern Ireland and Irish republicanism is markedly different from Scottish or Welsh republicanism. Helper201 (talk) 21:57, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Scottish republicanism and Welsh republicanism could be merged into Scottish nationalismScottish independence and Welsh nationalism. The Welsh article was demerged on Northumber on 23 November. TSventon (talk) 11:54, 26 November 2021 (UTC) On investigation, Scottish independence is a better target than Scottish nationalism. TSventon (talk) 13:58, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
TSventon, I am definitely against a merger in the article about nationalism. Generally speaking, I am against any mergers, since then accuracy suffer. However, if they nevertheless are merged, then the better target will be Republicanism in the United Kingdom, as this discussion for English republicanism redirect showed. --Northumber (talk) 12:16, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Irish republicanism is heavily linked to republicanism in the United Kingdom as the whole history of it is based on a republic independant from the UK. As such I would back merging all them into one if needs be, or seeing as Irish republicanism is more documented, giving a small section to it and linked to the main article. Mabuska (talk) 16:36, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that Scottish Republicanism is somewhat redundant and that a merge is in order. However, a merger entirely into this article would not be helpful - the largest section of Scottish Republicanism is dedicated to republicanism within the nationalist movement, which is related, but not particularly relevant to UK republicanism. The page is already organised into Republicanism within the independence movement and British republicanism sections - in my view, this lends itself very well to a two-way merge where content is merged either into Republicanism in the United Kingdom, or Scottish nationalism, depending on which article it would best serve. This would lead to a better structure of the encyclopaedia overall, as the existing Scottish Republicanism page does not describe a particular ideology or political movement, but rather multiple disparate movements which happen to have republicanism in common. Akakievich (talk) 19:11, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There is a challenge associated with the proposal that is mentioned by Akakievich but which needs to be enlarged on. As it stands, 'Republicanism in the United Kingdom' is essentially about 'Republicanism FOR the United Kingdom' i.e. it discusses maintaining the integrity of the UK under a different kind of constitution. 'Scottish Republicanism' on the other hand is, in its current form, clearly about dissolving the UK and creating and independent Scottish republic. This article attempts to address the idea of 'Scots who support the UK becoming a republic' but fails to find a credible current example. In short, the former article is essentially about a unionist approach whilst the latter is straightforwardly nationalist in its scope. This is not to say that a merger would be impossible, but as they stand the existing articles describe support for political outcomes that are not as similar in nature as the above discussion might suggest. The same issue would seem to apply to 'Welsh republicanism'. I cannot imagine how including Irish Nationalism in a merger would be legitimate. The article opens by stating that "Irish republicans view British rule in any part of Ireland as inherently illegitimate." Such a thing may even come under the scope of Arbcom authorizing "uninvolved administrators to impose discretionary sanctions on users who edit pages related to the Troubles" so please take care. I don't understand the logic of merging part of the article into Republicanism in the United Kingdom' and part into 'Scottish Nationalism'. There is next to nothing in the existing Scottish article that would end up in the UK one - in part (I theorise) because supporting the Union in Scotland is largely synonymous with supporting the monarchy just as it seems to be in Northern Ireland). Another way to say the same thing would be that any serious merger would require those interested in an article about 'Republicanism FOR the United Kingdom' accepting that a significant chunk of that article would now need to refer to the notion of dismantling the UK. Ben MacDui 15:58, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Opinion polling graph error

The graphical summary has an error I'm uncertain how to fix, so I'll note it here. Where it should say "May 2011" (I think, anyway), it instead says "May 201". IcePage (talk) 03:20, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Process of changing from a constitutional monarchy to a republic

A section describing the process of changing the United Kingdom from a constitutional monarchy to a republic would be interesting. John Link (talk) 21:15, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Republicanism_in_the_United_Kingdom&oldid=1109785105"