Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ireland

Irish Wikipedians' notice board
Home Irish Wikipedians' related news	Discussion Ireland related discussion (at WikiProject Ireland).	Active Users Active Irish Users	WikiProjects Irish WikiProjects	Stubs Major Irish stubs	Peer review Articles on Peer review	FA Articles on FA review	FA Drive Articles under consideration for FA drive

Irish articles assessed by quality

FA	A	GA	B	C	Start	Stub	FL	List	Category	Disambig	Draft	File	Portal	Project	Redirect	Template	NA	???	Total
69	0	250	1,552	5,798	31,080	26,771	8	3,442	26,551	186	81	180	26	20	3,101	3,078	26	11	102,230

Describing Dublin's suburban/commuter towns

It possibly hasn't escaped the attention of WikiProject members, but there's an ongoing series of edits (all effectively by the same [Virgin Media ISP customer] IP contributor) to change the descriptions of Dublin's suburban/commuter towns and villages. Some of these changes seem, at best, inconsistent: Where administratively distinct county towns like Dun Laoghaire and Swords become just "suburbs", and administratively/geographically separated villages like Newcastle also become "suburbs", while areas at least partially within the Dublin City Council area like Chapelizod become "towns".

While I'm conscious that these inconsistencies are potential indicators of a disruptive intent, and assuming good faith instead, I wonder if there are thoughts on how to address. Building on past discussion (and resulting consensus) on using council dev plan "settlement hierarchy" classifications to distinguish a "town" from a "village", I wonder if there any similar thoughts/suggestions on differentiating "suburb" from "suburb (village core") from "suburban town" from "commuter town"? Or should it just be case=by-case? With the onus on the changing editor to justify? Guliolopez (talk) 09:45, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

In terms of inconsistency, I might note a series of edits (made in quick succession by the same IP contributor) where Portmarnock and Adamstown become "suburbs", while Malahide becomes a "town".

While some of these edits were reverted by WikiProject members, the Adamstown lead still says "suburb" (with no qualifier to clarify that it is geographically/administratively separate from the city and therefore different from more "urban" suburbs like Foxrock or Clonskeagh or whatever). This, to me, stands in contrast to my own understanding. As Adamstown is, notably IMO, a "planned town". And generally described as such. (Irish Times - "planned town", Irish Independent - "planned town", Irish Times - "new town", Irish Independent - "new town", BBC - "new town", Irish Examiner - "first new town", etc. )

Are there other thoughts? If not, I suppose "case by case" (reference based) is probably the way to go? Guliolopez (talk) 10:22, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Even assuming good faith, my inclination is to simply revert. While there's nothing wrong with taking the opportunity of disruption to reassess terminology, in this instance, I'd favour the collective wisdom of Wikipedia editors over the years, some of whom have done good work on histories of settlements in Ireland, however described. So yes, the burden should be on the changing editor to justify, especially where they are doing so at scale, possibly in good faith but mistaken understanding of the relationship between these towns and the metropolis of Dublin city centre. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 12:22, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks @Iveagh Gardens. As it happens, whether my opening this thread was causal or coincidental, the contributor(s) engaging in this stuff have since increased the related pattern of edits. As ser! and others will be aware. While (as you note) this "disruption" has prompted some review and improvement on the terminology in several articles (and, for example, I am now more than satisfied that there's sufficient reliable/"quality" sources to describe Chapelizod as a "suburban village"), in other cases the disruption continues. I'm happy to continue (conscious of 3RR and OWN and indeed DFTT) reverting the most clearly disruptive/unhelpful changes - but remain interested in other thoughts/input. ANI and PP are, of course, always an option. Anyway, thanks for the input... Guliolopez (talk) 17:43, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

I'd agree with this approach. WP:CON and WP:ONUS would apply. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 14:52, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

FYI. While I opened threads at Talk:Adamstown, Dublin, Talk:Lucan, Dublin and Talk:Chapelizod to highlight concerns with the recent anon edits (hopefully all now addressed), the pattern continues on other articles. Including at Chapelizod where the (same?) anon/anons continue to make entirely inconsistent edits. Including wavering dramatically between "suburb" and "town". Just FYI. Guliolopez (talk) 13:57, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

Still ongoing. Any remaining assumption of "good faith", on my part, is completely faded. Not least as places as distant/separate from the city as Lusk are being changed from "village/town" to "suburb". And the Liberties also become just another "suburb". I hate to say it, but either WP:CIR or WP:DE/trolling apply here. Or possibly both. WP:DENYing from now on. Not wasting my time reasoning with the unreasonable. Guliolopez (talk) 17:57, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

@Guliolopez: Same editor is over on the Irish language Wikipedia. I've not had time to dig in and analyse the edits, but some had removed references to Logainm.ie which I simply reverted. Dunno what their game is, but maybe someone could take a look? - Alison ^talk 06:26, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Hmm. OK. Thanks @Alison. Will take a look and see if there are any policy issues there. Guliolopez (talk) 08:07, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Commons image files up for deletion

An editor has nominated around a dozen images for deletion, on the grounds that 'Similar to the UK, Freedom of Panorama does not apply in Ireland', which would seem to be contradicted by the Commons page on the subject. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 14:48, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

The first point of COM:FOP Ireland states that, similar to the UK, Irish Freedom of Panorama only applies to buildings and 3d works of art (e.g. statues), not to 2d works like paintings and photos. Consigned (talk) 13:20, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi Consigned. As COM:FOP Ireland states, Freedom of Panorama is:

OK for 3D works

OK for 2D "works of artistic craftsmanship"

and it then goes on to state:

The copyright in a work to which this section applies is not infringed by (a) making a painting, drawing, diagram, map, chart, plan, engraving, etching, lithograph, woodcut, print or similar thing representing it, (b) making a photograph or film of it, or (c) broadcasting or including in a cable programme service, an image of it.[28/2000 Sec.93(2)]

So I'm really not seeing what the issue is. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 11:01, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

Paintings and murals are not 2D works of artistic craftsmanship, they are just standard 2D works. Consigned (talk) 13:20, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

The relevant act is here. The act doesn't specifically define "artistic craftsmanship", just stating it's a subset of "artistic work": "artistic work" includes a work of any of the following descriptions, irrespective of their artistic quality— (a) photographs, paintings, drawings, diagrams, maps, charts, plans, engravings, etchings, lithographs, woodcuts, prints or similar works, collages or sculptures (including any cast or model made for the purposes of a sculpture), (b) works of architecture, being either buildings or models for buildings, and (c) works of artistic craftsmanship; Section 51 (fair dealing), and Section 93 (representation of certain artistic works on public display) would both seem to apply, especially as "works of artistic craftsmanship" aren't specifically defined anywhere. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 15:17, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

The fact that "works of artistic craftsmanship" is in a different subset as paintings suggests to me that they are different. Two examples of works of artistic craftsmanship that I've heard of are furniture and cookoo clocks, though these were in other countries; it's hard to find examples in Ireland specifically. If you search Commons Village Pump for artistic craftsmanship you'll see the same discussion has happened many times across many countries (not sure about Ireland); in my experience the discussions tend to arrive at the same conclusion, that a painting or mural is not a work of artistic craftsmanship. Consigned (talk) 15:54, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

Naming convention for places in County Dublin

I've proposed a change to the naming convention for places in County Dublin at Talk:Adamstown, Dublin, which I think is in line with MOS:IRISHCOUNTIES. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 12:01, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Moving the conversation to this general discussion area. In general, the style guide at MOS:IRISHCOUNTIES reads "Use the full county name (i.e., County X) when referring to counties, rather than abbreviating to the short name (i.e., X)". However, in the case of most settlements in Dublin, the articles are titled Y, Dublin, rather than Y, County Dublin. I posited that this makes sense for those in the city itself, but beyond that, County Dublin should be in the article title. A similar distinction is found in Douglas, Cork vs Mallow, County Cork. I do think it is helpful for article titles to make this distinction. As there was not a clear consensus for a proposal based on the administrative city, I've included it among three proposals for discussion.

• Administrative divide: as initially proposed. Advantage: follows a legal distinction. Disadvantage: may not reflect changing population development and the fact that cities in practice spread beyond that governed by a city council.
• Population divide: places outside the jurisdiction of the city council but part of urban base of the city should retain the Y, Dublin format, whereas somewhere further out should be retitled, e.g., Naul, County Dublin for the Naul. This has an objective reference in the CSO map of urban areas.
• Postcode divide: places within the Dublin postcode system should retain the Y, Dublin format, whereas places with County Dublin in their postal address, see e.g., Blackrock should be moved to Blackrock, County Dublin. This has the advantage of matching WP:COMMONNAME.

I'm tagging ww2censor, Bastun, Sarah777, Amakuru and Financefactz as participants in the earlier discussion. FWIW, I might now be more inclined towards the postcode divide, as it does reflect common usage. Although County Dublin is not an administrative entity, it is used officially in addresses, so remains a geographic term. It is also very occasionally used administratively, such as the Dublin County Returning Officer, so it's non-existence can be over-stated. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 07:55, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

Support: That sounds like a reasonable compromise. It also supports common usage to an extent - as mentioned, most people would say "Blackrock, County Dublin" and "Sandyford, Dublin 18" or "Sandyford in Dublin". Common usage is largely based on the pre-eircode address system. Think "Donnybrook, Dublin 4". Having said that I prefer the system as it is - but I agree that "Naul, Dublin" is out of synch with common usage and could be misleading - though I remain unconvinced that Admastown is any problem at all as it contiguous part of the built-up area. Sarah777 (talk) 09:05, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

Addendum - I suppose one risk with the "dual system" is that marginal cases, suburbs that were separate but are recently contiguous such as Newcastle, Dublin or Rathcoole, Dublin could become controversial. We might need to agree on a list of what's in and what's out. Sarah777 (talk) 17:05, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

Support: (Population/Geographic divide) or similar. Administrative council areas of Fingal etc. do not have a firm or permanent boundary and aren't used in addresses or popular naming convention. The only naming convention that we can say with a degree of certainty will not be changed or altered and is in common usage is county names. The borders of the city will always be up for debate with areas just outside/inside the city, that is the only downside which I cans see. Clontarf, Dublin. I think the vast majority of people wouldn't regard Adamstown as being part of the city proper. Financefactz (talk) 10:34, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

Well, define "City proper"? Inside the canals? The Dublin City Council area? I'd go for contiguous built-up areas - and that would absolutely include Adamstown! Sarah777 (talk) 23:34, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Adamstown is part of the contiguous built-up area of Dublin. It is not part of the Dublin postcode system, having Co. Dublin in its addresses. Although the former would suggest that Adamstown should be named Adamstown, Dublin, I'd be inclined to think that on the common name principle, Adamstown, County Dublin is a more objective choice. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 17:45, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Nowhere has a firm or permanent boundary! Dublin Corporation was abolished and replaced with Dublin City Council. County Dublin was abolished as an administrative area and was replaced with Fingal, Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown and the (poorly named, imho) 'South Dublin County Council' administrative area. Swords, Dublin - the county town of Fingal, remember! - is described as Swords in County Dublin, the county town of the local government area of Fingal, is a large suburban town on the east coast of Ireland, situated ten kilometres[10] north of Dublin city centre - which is just clumsy and confusing! If anything, that should be at Swords, Fingal! Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 18:15, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Except that Swords, County Dublin is a common name based on postal addresses. County Dublin continues to have official recognition as a placename, as did County Tipperary even before its 2014 merger. Settlements shouldn’t be considered only in their administrative function when being named for article title purposes. (I agree on the name of South Dublin; it was Dublin–Belgard until 1991, but surely they could have found some better name!). Iveagh Gardens (talk) 08:28, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

Very South-East Meath? ;-) Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 15:18, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

Support: (Population/Geographic divide) or similar - I think it's about the contiguous urban area. It's definitely not about the Dublin City Council area, which has hold only lopsided bits of the city for a long time. And the old conventions of "between the canals" (maybe still valid for "inner city") or between "Tolka and Dodder" are long-superseded too - there is no doubt that the city now includes Tallaght, Malahide and Dun Laoghaire (and Dalkey and Killiney) as direct suburbs, whatever their pasts. It seems clear for now that it does not include Swords, and absolutely not the villages (even with suburban housing) and small towns of the outer county (Newcastle, Lusk, Rush, Skerries, Naul, Balbriggan, etc.). Which leaves the "western corridor" - to Lucan, Adamstown and Leixlip - this is harder. My own instinct is that these are not yet "city" but the connection is growing. A timely discussion, thanks Iveagh Gardens... and apologies for joining late, I have been off sick for 3.5 weeks, longest absence in 5+ years.SeoR (talk) 23:35, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

Comment: to be clear, I absolutely believe that County Dublin has a place still, including in this matter. But I also believe that the old "Blackrock, County Dublin" (covering a vast area, purely on the basis of how P&T managed addresses) is long over, and that we do need to look to the now-large continuous city area (most of the lands girdled by the M50, and some of what lies beyond, including most of Greater Tallaght, Greater Blanchardstown and Greater Clondalkin.SeoR (talk) 23:38, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

If that is the divide we’re going for, which can be assessed according to the CSO maps, Brittas is correctly titled as Brittas, County Dublin, but Monkstown, County Dublin would be moved to Monkstown, Dublin. – Iveagh Gardens (talk) 09:42, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

We're making progress - but I must remain a bit Bolshie about Adamstown. Twenty plus years ago it was a little known rural townland just outside the edge of the the city. It now sits within the contiguous built-up area. It wasn't even know back when we had Blackrock, County Dublin or Donnybrook, Dublin 4. So no tradition to offend!

As for Monkstown, Dublin and Brittas, County Dublin - agree they are the best solutions.

Sarah777 (talk) 17:45, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Refined move proposal

Following the discussion above, I would propose adding the following sentence to MOS:IRISHCOUNTIES, "Settlements within the built-up area of a city or town which are included within its census population are marked as Blackrock, Dublin, Douglas, Cork or Rialto, Dublin." The CSO provides an objective standard by which to test this.

On that basis, I would suggest moving these pages only:

• Baldonnel, Dublin → Baldonnel, County Dublin
• Collinstown, Santry → Collinstown, County Dublin
• Dardistown, Dublin → Dardistown, County Dublin
• Holywell, Swords → Holywell, County Dublin
• Lusk, Dublin → Lusk, County Dublin
• Man of War, Fingal → Man of War, County Dublin
• Monkstown, County Dublin → Monkstown, Dublin
• Naul, Dublin → Naul, County Dublin
• Newcastle, Dublin → Newcastle, County Dublin
• Oldtown, Dublin → Oldtown, County Dublin
• Rathcoole, Dublin → Rathcoole, County Dublin
• Rush, Dublin → Rush, County Dublin
• Skerries, Dublin → Skerries, County Dublin
• Springhill, Dublin → Springhill, County Dublin
• St. Margaret's, Dublin → St. Margaret's, County Dublin
• Sutton, Dublin → Sutton, County Dublin
• Swords, Dublin → Swords, County Dublin

This list is based on what's in or out of the census area of Dublin city and its suburbs. Holywell, Swords is actually in the census area of Kinsealy–Drinan, so not part of the population statistics of Swords, whereas Applewood, Swords, Brackenstown, Swords and Rathbeale, Swords, which were in the original proposal, are part of the Swords census area.

I'd welcome the views in favour, against, or for modification from any editors, tagging Amakuru, Bastun, Financefactz, Sarah777, SeoR and ww2censor who commented above.

Thanks for a clear proposition, and I could get behind such an objective approach. Almost all seem 100% clear - Baldonnel, Collinstown, Man of War, Naul, Rush, etc. One is possibly just a slip - Sutton (as with Howth) is within that highlighted area, and rightly so, being fully contiguous with broader Dublin. Now, interestingly, that definition does cut out Portmarnock and Malahide, which are generally considered suburbs - but I can see a certain logic to this, as there is a solid line of Green Belt between Baldoyle (in) and Portmarnock (out), and the same between Balgriffin and Malahide, so in a way they are severed from the contiguous city - and so, for the sake of clarity, and for naming purposes, this could work. The proposal deals with the southern and western suburbs well, I think. SeoR (talk) 23:13, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Sutton was indeed a slip. Incidentally, a place that with Howth was part of the city administratively from 1942 to 1985, before being transferred to proto-Fingal. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 17:57, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

I'd quibble with Newcastle, Baldonnel, and Rathcoole - they are both now emersed in the contiguous area. Sutton? Hardly; its been part of the contiguous area for generations! Sarah777 (talk) 17:56, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

I think if we agree to this approach we should be open to revising names in the light of the still rapidly expanding city. For example, Kilternan was absolutely a "County Dublin" candidate even five years ago - in the next three years, it will be totally absorbed. Sarah777 (talk) 18:01, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

As I said, Sutton was a slip, and for many decades was administratively considered part of the city, so no argument there. If we go with the urban base, we should use the objective standard set by the CSO in its assessment of what are separate areas. Otherwise, we're into the realm of original research, making an assessment about whether a place like Rathcoole feels like a contiguous suburb or a separate area. What it includes may change over time (just as a reference in a historic context might reasonably be to Tallaght, County Dublin). It seems straightforward enough to say that we can give a population statistics for a place such that it's not part of the larger figure of the population of the city, it is distinct from it by an objective standard. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 19:09, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

I see the (anti-)OR issue, and I think this proposal would be a good next step, keeping in mind Sarah777's point that we need to maintain things under review. Because indeed, we each have our own ideas: I'd say Newcastle is still distinct, as is Swords, that Rathcoole is merging into the urban blob, Baldonnel is still a little apart, and Malahide and Portmarnock are suburbs but separated by a strip of land. But others would have different ideas, and we need an objective measure. SeoR (talk) 00:42, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

"making an assessment about whether a place like Rathcoole feels like a contiguous suburb". I base my assessments on Open Street Map, not any "feeling"! Sarah777 (talk) 14:01, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

That would still involve us as Wikipedia editors doing the original assessment and making our own call based on reading the map, rather than an objective external factor of a CSO-produced map, done in consultation with other state bodies. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 08:53, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure why Open Street Map can't be cited as a reliable source for contiguity. Sarah777 (talk) 23:54, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean by using it as a source for contiguity. Do you mean looking at it, as with any up-to-date map, and checking whether there is green space between urban areas? Or does it have lines and areas that are objectively defined, other than you or I looking at the map? Iveagh Gardens (talk) 11:52, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

"does it have lines and areas that are objectively defined". Yes! It's a fantastic resource. Sarah777 (talk) 14:35, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

What I mean is, does it have an area of Dublin City that would include Adamstown but exclude the Naul? What I found when I searched for Dublin was the administrative area of the city. When you say that you are using Open Street Map as a source for contiguity, I don't know what you mean in practice. How does another editor here verify if the right call has been made? Iveagh Gardens (talk) 15:07, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

They could look at the map? How, apart from looking at some map, do you decide what contiguity is? Sarah777 (talk) 15:33, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

That to me clearly amounts to original research. I as a Wikipedia editor shouldn't be deciding what a contiguous area is by looking at the map. Which is why I've sought an external objective standard, be that administrative boundaries, postal addresses, or the map the CSO produced in conjunction with Tailte Éireann. Following back and forth, I would conclude that the last is the best approach. Looking at the CSO-produced map, I would have said Saggart is part of the Dublin City urban sprawl, or that Malahide and Portmarnock are contiguous and could be treated together, but better minds than mine, or, more crucially, independently verifiable minds, have made an assessment of what separate urban areas are. We should defer to them rather than taking a vote between active Wikipedia editors on whether there is sufficient distance from one urban area to another for it to count as separate. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 16:36, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

"I've sought an external objective standard". The problem is that there is none in relation to Dublin's contiguous area - other than observing contiguity on the ground or by looking at a map/satellite picture. These are easily referenced, and thus don't constitute "original research". Trawling around for non-existent "official" maps seems much closer to "original research". Sarah777 (talk) 21:16, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

I’m not sure I can say we have consensus on this, there certainly isn’t complete agreement. If not, perhaps I ought to reformat this as a proper multiple proposed move later today to go through the full process. I’ve also removed Holywell from the proposal, having found another home for its contents. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 08:42, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

IDK, I think it's close, but ideally 2-3 more editors would weigh in. I think the remaining question is (as an example) about Adamstown. For me, it's just an extension of Lucan (which was its address before the "new town" development), and its treatment should follow that locale. But I don't think we should over-exert over edge cases - we do need an objective basis, and it's never going to be perfect, or fully current (sources almost always lag, which is a challenge in much of our work here). So I think Adamstown, Lucan, Malahide and Portmarnock all display the characteristics of suburbs, but I'm happy to work with the CSO's definitions for the purposes of clean management of the structure. It's hard to argue that the national statistical authority is not a good source. SeoR (talk) 09:42, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Although I’d used it as the base of the initial discussion, this was only because it was first alphabetically. I have no strong attachments to Adamstown being marked as outside the Dublin urban core. There seems to be strongest support for using the population basis, rather than the administrative or address basis, and on that basis, it should remain at Adamstown, Dublin, as should Lucan, Dublin. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 11:34, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Julian Bradley#Requested move 22 March 2025

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Julian Bradley#Requested move 22 March 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 11:05, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Requested move 16 April 2025

• Baldonnel, Dublin → Baldonnel, County Dublin
• Collinstown, Santry → Collinstown, County Dublin
• Dardistown, Dublin → Dardistown, County Dublin
• Lusk, Dublin → Lusk, County Dublin
• Man of War, Fingal → Man of War, County Dublin
• Monkstown, County Dublin → Monkstown, Dublin
• Naul, Dublin → Naul, County Dublin
• Newcastle, Dublin → Newcastle, County Dublin
• Oldtown, Dublin → Oldtown, County Dublin
• Rathcoole, Dublin → Rathcoole, County Dublin
• Rush, Dublin → Rush, County Dublin
• Skerries, Dublin → Skerries, County Dublin
• Springhill, Dublin → Springhill, County Dublin
• St. Margaret's, Dublin → Saint Margaret's, County Dublin
• Swords, Dublin → Swords, County Dublin

– To determine, I've moved this to a formal request. Any consideration before closing should consider the conversation to date on WT:IE and previously on Talk:Adamstown, Dublin. In summary, areas within the area defined by the CSO as Dublin City and its Suburbs should have the ", Dublin" style, while those outside it should marked as ", County Dublin". Any page could be moved if the CSO redefine areas after the 2027 census. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 21:29, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

I'd question Rathcoole and even Newcastle. Also Swords and obviously Collinstown. Sarah777 (talk) 14:39, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

I don't think this should be decided on a case-by-case basis, but an agreement on what standard we're using, and that this should be one that can be independently verified. There was a growing sense among comments above that the line should be whether a place is part of the general population area of Dublin City. I can't think of a better measure than the definitions used by the CSO. We might question their call, but at least it's an objective and independent measure. We could discuss another objective independent measure as an alternative. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 15:13, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Which CSO definitions do you refer to? Sarah777 (talk) 21:22, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

The ones on their interactive data visualisations map of towns, with Dublin City and its suburbs here highlighted. Getting this map didn't take a trawl, it's used as a source for population for many towns here on Wikipedia already, so to respond to your comment above, it's not true to say that it's a non-existent "official" map. The CSO published a notice in 2023 on the methodology used to derive these to "[formulate] a methodology to objectively identify and delineate Settlements". The shapefiles for these areas are also separately available through CSO/Tailte Éireann open data.

On the other hand, assessing these boundaries ourselves, with reference to maps, to my mind comes much closer to a clear instance of original research, "On Wikipedia, original research means material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published source exists. This includes any analysis or synthesis of published material that reaches or implies a conclusion not stated by the sources." Using the maps ourselves relies on some degree of subjectivity; what if we differ on whether Newcastle is sufficiently far from other areas to be distinct or contiguous, while looking at the same map? Iveagh Gardens (talk) 20:35, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

• Leaning oppose. I'm not an expert on Irish geography, but my feeling here is that we largely have a WP:AINTBROKE situation. If we label all towns in the historical County Dublin as simply "X, Dublin" that's a consistent rule we're not really being inaccurate, regardless of how you choose to interpret that. Either it's a suburb of Dublin, or it's part of the County Dublin area, or both... "Dublin" just sort of covers all the ground, and I'm not sure we benefit by adding "County" into the title and making it less WP:CONCISE. I also think it would be somewhat odd to have one rule for Category:Places in Dún Laoghaire–Rathdown and a different rule for Category:Places in Fingal. My suggestion would be to unify them all under the "X, Dublin" umbrella, including moving Man of War, Fingal and Palmerstown, Fingal, and leave it at that.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:34, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

  A small note on Palmerstown, Fingal, that's named as it is and would likely have to stay there regardless because there's a more prominent Palmerstown in the south of the county.

  While adding "County" does make it less concise, that's true of towns across the country, where the guidance at MOS:IRISHCOUNTIES is to use the full name of the county, giving in practice Bray, County Wicklow rather than Bray, Wicklow. This is in line with common usage within Ireland, so following WP:COMMONNAME. It comes then to whether there should be a different rule within Dublin, whether city or county. The usage of County Dublin has persisted beyond the division of the county at a local government level in 1994, including at an official level, see e.g. the preliminary result of the 2022 census where a figure is given for County Dublin as a whole, including the city and the three counties defined in local government acts.

  It makes sense that a place that is an area within the city of Dublin should have ",  Dublin" in its article title rather than County Dublin. But what of the places that are not within the city? I don't think they should break the style we use for other counties because they are in the same county as the capital city. This is clearly true in the case of Naul, Dublin, which is in rural north County Dublin; less clear in the case of Rathcoole, Dublin, which while being distinct, is not as clearly distant from the urban core.

  It's not that I'm proposing one rule for Category:Places in Dún Laoghaire–Rathdown and a different rule for Category:Places in Fingal. Sutton and Lusk are both within Fingal, but the rule I'm proposing (based on the standard of what's in the city determined by the national population and mapping agencies) would treat Sutton as within the city and Lusk as not, as we would retain Sutton, Dublin but move the other to Lusk, County Dublin. It is the case that as the urban core of the city grew, it spread mostly within the south of the county, whereas the north of the county has become urbanised separately, but the differing treatment is not based on the different authorities per se. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 07:36, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

• Support. I have no strong opinion, but it seems there was roughly agreement in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ireland#Naming_convention_for_places_in_County_Dublin that some places should be "County Dublin" rather than "Dublin". I'm happy to support it too. And I think the CSO "Dublin city and suburbs" is a good source. This is not to say that following the one source should be the rule – editors are free to raise other source material / evidence and weigh them – but in broad strokes it seems like the best I see in the discussion so far. Adumbrativus (talk) 05:51, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
• Support - on balance, and having being involved in the discussion before, I think this proposal advances matters. As the previous editor notes, this does not limit consideration of other sources / points when relevant. SeoR (talk) 01:55, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
• Support - on balance and to put this issue to bed. Though I can stretch to accepting some of margin calls, regarding Rathcoole the fact is it's completely in the contagious area. And we may have to revisit Swords soon! Still think this is good example of fixing something that isn't broken. Sarah777 (talk) 02:45, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:3Arena#Requested move 18 April 2025

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:3Arena#Requested move 18 April 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Valorrr ^{(lets chat)} 16:27, 18 April 2025 (UTC)