Talk:Ireland

British isles

The phrase "British Isles in relation to Ireland (as used in the introduction) is at best highly controversial. This is the relevant Irish government directive on its use of the phrase in relation to Ireland. "Dáil Éireann, Volume 606, 28 September 2005. In his response, the Irish Minister for Foreign Affairs stated that "The British Isles is not an officially recognised term in any legal or inter-governmental sense. It is without any official status. The Government, including the Department of Foreign Affairs, does not use this term. Our officials in the Embassy of Ireland, London, continue to monitor the media in Britain for any abuse of the official terms as set out in the Constitution of Ireland and in legislation. These include the name of the State, the President, Taoiseach and others." Also see: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Isles_naming_dispute. The UK government has also made moves not to use the phrase in relation to Ireland whether politically or geographically within official government communicas There is also an issue here relevant to decolonising the language of empire previously deemed acceptable, but no longer so. Mogh Roith (talk) 22:17, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Is there an edit you would like to suggest? Cashew.wheel (talk) 22:20, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

North Atlantic Archipelago 148.252.141.177 (talk) 09:49, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Yes, and that is pretty much the only statement a member of the government of Ireland has ever made about it. As has been raised before, a single (albeit cabinet) member of one governmental branch from 17 years ago does not an overall Irish government policy make. A simple search also shows that the term is used in Irish government documents and reports even today. Canterbury Tail talk 22:30, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi Cashew.wheel. thank you for the reply. I believe the most common phrase in current usage is the "Atlantic Archipelago" Other phrases include the "British Isles and Ireland“ ot the "Western Atlantic Isles" Of course there are some who may suggest that when referring to the Island Ireland in the context of the two islands- that the phrase the " Irish Isles" should be used and visa versa when referring to the Island of Britain ;) Mogh Roith (talk) 01:05, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi Canterbury Tail Not quite. The official Irish government guidance detailing a prohibition on the use of the phrase "British isles" remains unchanged. Responding to questions from the Irish Press in 2013, the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) stated that the government’s position on the use of the phrase remains the same as outlined in a Parliamentary Question detailed above. Regardless that the phrase may have been occasionally be used by individuals or otherwise doesn't negate those still current guidelines. Mogh Roith (talk) 01:15, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Again?

Is there any evidence that the alternatives have made it into common language? The Banner talk 08:53, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Hey Banner. Im unsure what "again" refers too? Afaik this hasn't raised here previously? Do you mean the detail is included in the Wiki article on differences in the acceptable use of the phrase between Ireland and the UK? To answer your question yes a number of alternatives are already found inncommon usage in Ireland. The most common one is "Atlantic Archipelago" as far as I'm aware. For example this from the Irish Times on overfishing in Irish waters: "The north Atlantic archipelago has also “unilaterally” increased its own quota of blue whiting which can be caught by more than 225 per cent, from 82,000 tonnes to 267,413 tonnes, says the KFO. Mr O’Donoghue said this increase was “off the Richter scale”.

This from University College Dublin research network online network: "Atlantic Archipelagos Research Project: The Irish Sea. Description: The Atlantic Archipelagos Research Project is a collaboration between eleven leading academics in the UK and Ireland to investigate the complex of relations that make for the contemporary islands of Britain and Ireland"

Plenty of other examples of usage for 'Atlantic Archipelago' as well. This is the current text of the 'Ireland' Wiki article which I referred to: "Ireland is the second-largest island of the British Isles, the third-largest in Europe, and the twentieth-largest on Earth" I believe the text of this short paragraph could quite easily be amended to reflect the more contemporary description of the Islands of Ireland and Britain as islands off the mainland of Europe, especially in light of the historical context and controversary surrounding the use of phrase "British Isles" in relation to Ireland. Mogh Roith (talk) 10:58, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Maybe you should take a look at the archives to see why I shouted "again"!

And it is nice that you confirm that the alternative names are not in common use but only used incidental. The Banner talk 11:38, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

To get back to the Dermot Ahern quote, he only says that British Isles has no official status. He doesn't say that it is forbidden. Atlantic Archipelago has no "official status" either. Scolaire (talk) 12:46, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Ok. You will have to excuse my lack of poking around in the archives as I'm fairly new here and noted that the issue was currently unflagged. And to reply: no the phrase "Atlantic Archipelago" (as an example of an alternative phraseology) is not "incidental". There were just two examples which can be found in the public sphere. Colloquially I don’t knew anyone in Ireland who uses the term 'British Isles" to describe Irelands position relative to the island of Britain in regular conversation. Can I prove that? No unfortunately I cannot. You'll have to take my word there. As to "forbidden" I don't believe anyone has used that particular argument. In terms of official language, governments tend to advise (not legally forbid) words and phrases which shouldn't be used. In respect of that position, then certainly there should be an acknowledgement of that in the terminology used describing Ireland in relation to its neighbour . All that said, I think we're getting fairly far away from the obvious point that the use of the phrase "British Isles" in this article appears largely superfluous. A straighforward substitutiion shouldn't require delving deep into political or historical issues or the need that any change has to have defacto "official status". For example in my experience and in regular conversation, the two islands are often simply described as Ireland and England. That may be a better alternative to those who are terminally entrenched in favour of the use of the now somewhat archaic phrase "British isles"

May I suggest a simple reworking of the phrase used descbing Ireland position in relation to its neighbour in favour of something less potentially divisive? Mogh Roith (talk) 13:36, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

It would be helpful if you didn't just make assertions not backed up by anything. Please - do read the archives. They're not really all that long, but all of the points you have raised have been addressed there, on more than one occasion, at either this page's archives, or those to be found at Talk:British Isles and Talk:British Isles naming dispute. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 13:58, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Ok but whats with the grist? I've not "just made up assertions". I've backed up what I've said with concrete examples where possible. See above. But if you would people to record the conversations of people in Ireland using alternatives to the "British isles" thats going to be a fairly long winded exercise in negation through recording the absence of the phrase in common speech. The fact is, there is no need to determine any absolute concensus of exactly how many people don't use the phrase in Ireland, when we know that the use of the phrase is already highly controversial and the Irish governments position is that it's "not an officially recognised term in Ireland". Not me saying that btw. That's a quote

Re. The British Isles naming dispute wiki article, I've already read it. I was referring to the use of the phrase in this particular article which refers to the Island of Ireland in relation to its neighbour only. As detailed may I suggest a simple reworking of the phrase used to describe Irelands position in relation to its neighbour, in favour of something less potentially divisive? Or maybe you have another constructive suggestion? Mogh Roith (talk) 15:57, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

I have a couple, yes. Stop using proof by assertion: an "archaic phrase" wouldn't generate 10 pages of Google search results, said results limited to Irish sites from the past year. And regardless of a government minister stating that a particular geographic term has no standing, it still seems to see common enough recent use in the Oireachtas. You may not like the term - that's your right, of course - but there's no problem with its use in this article. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 16:17, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Again no. Common speech as in every day use and/or alternative usage (as was requested to be proven above) is not going to turn up in a Google search. Regardless of any separate dispute as to who does and who does not use the phrase on Irish websites (not limited to ongoing online disputes about the use of said phrase or the fact that not only Irish people are quoted or engage with these "Irish websites" - the original point is that the use of the phrase (already acknowledged as being highly controversial elsewhere in wikipedia and etc) in this article is superfluous. Especially considering the article is about Ireland and not the neighbouring Island of Britain The phrase doesn't have to used at all especially where a simple reworking of the highlighted section to describe Irelands position in relation to its neighbour, in favour of something less potentially divisive would resolve the entire matter. And btw it doesn't have to be any officially sanctioned "Atlantic Archipelago" or any other replacement phrase. A general description or any other reworking would more than suffice.

Tbh this would not amount to a big change, but as you detailed, its certainly been requested several times on this page. Btw my feelings are irrelevant. But I do acknowledge that the use of the phrase in this instance is going to continue to garner significant controversy "again" Therefore may I suggest that a simple reworking of the phrase used to describe Irelands position in relation to its neighbour, in favour of something less potentially divisive that would make everyone happy. Mogh Roith (talk) 16:47, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

I empathise with you on this and agree that the use of the term "British Isles" in relation to Ireland does not sit well with some people. Like it or not, it is the WP:COMMONNAME as others have mentioned, alternatives have not gained traction and are unknown outside of niche circles. As previously mentioned, Wikipedia is not the place to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS.

So I would be opposed to rephrasing it's reference in the article to an alternative.

However, I do see merit in discussing whether the inclusion of the "British Isles" in reference to island sizes adds sufficient value to the article to warrant it's inclusion.

Does the referring to the size of the island relative to other European and all islands globally suffice? Cashew.wheel (talk) 16:39, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Oppose I would be a serious and controversial change. Beside that, Wikipedia is following the common use of a term, not introducing new terms. The Banner talk 19:00, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

OK I'm not sure I understand you. How would using a couple of alternative words to describe the size of Ireland relative to its neighbour Britain be a "serious and controversial" change? That and no introduction of any new terms would be necessary. Mogh Roith (talk) 20:49, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

So you did not read the prior discussions? And you also do not understand the article British Isles naming dispute? The Banner talk 21:18, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

OK to reiterate Yes I have read the prior discussions. Yes I have also read and understand the various arguments in the article referred to. Rewording a sentence in this article and simply dropping the phrase "British Isles" (as superfluous to begin with in the context of the sentence) would not equate to a "serious and controversial change" regardless. And to do so does not necessarily involve using any new terms. The proposal is a simple reworking of the phrase used to describe Irelands position in relation to its neighbour, in favour of something less potentially divisive and which would accommodate everyone. I'm not sure how I can make that any clearer. Mogh Roith (talk) 10:17, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

I understand that you are passionate about it. But again Wikipedia follows the common use of a term and is not a vanguard to promote a term and its use. It is not a simple semantic change, but a highly controversial and rather political change. I has already been shot down many times and you do not offer a new view or arguments at all. The Banner talk 10:35, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Oppose, also. Nope, Wikipedia is not censored. By far the most common term for these islands is "the British Isles", and that's why we use the term. You are, of course, free to take offence at the use of the term, but this is not the place to right great wrongs. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 14:03, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Banner. I'm unsure from where the hyperbole has crept into this discussion, however as outlined there is no request to make any "highly controversial" or "political change". The request is simply to alter the wording of one small section of the article to a wording, which would be acceptable to all. The points made are that the term "British isles" as used in the context of the article is A) unnecessary B) divisive. The objective would be to simplify and clarify the description using non divisive language. Currently that clearly is not the case (see archive discussions here etc)

And to clarify. A term does not need to be used in the article, as a simple change of wording will more than adequately allow for a description of the size of the two islands relative to each other, to be detailed. And no term need be "promoted" over any other. Two birds, one stone. Mogh Roith (talk) 15:58, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

You are mistaken. And your private opinion does not align with the way Wikipedia works. And what you write her, is a classic case of WP:IDIDNOTHEARTHAT. The Banner talk 16:06, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Batsun respectfully. My personal feelings have not been detailed as they are not relevant to the discussion. As I'm sure you'd agree that your own feelings would be concerning the same issue. To reiterate, in the context of the article in question, the use of the term "British isles" in relation to the size of islands relative to each other is clearly unnecessary and divisive (see this and previous discussions). Btw the editing of that text should not equate to any 'censorship' as there is no suppression of any information required to make the necessary changes. Sin é. Mogh Roith (talk) 16:34, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Banner. Your link. Re "Failure or refusal to "get the point". You do know that I could just as easily redirect that to your own position yes? Again its not my "personal opinion". This issue has been been raised repeatedly (see archives). That the term as used in the context of that particular article is divisive as is clearly shown here and as generally detailed elsewhere in Wikipedia. The specific issue here is not going to go away by burying our collective heads in the sand. My approach here was to suggest a workable solution. And I can't say I haven't tried. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯|> Mogh Roith (talk) 16:51, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

@Mogh Roith: Let's forget the hyperbole. Here's a policy-based reason: reading the archives, you will see that this question has been aired many times, but nobody has ever been able to gain a consensus to remove that term from the article. You haven't done so this time, either. WP:CONSENSUS is a policy; it is how we deal with such questions. Therefore, the term remains. Scolaire (talk) 16:55, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Cashew.wheel. My apologies I had missed your reply above. OK thanks for those points. Re. The use of the term in context in this particular example "I would question whether the use British Isles" in reference to island sizes adds sufficient value to the article to warrant it's inclusion" Looking at the text in question, there is a strong case that it doesn't. Mogh Roith (talk) 17:08, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

@Mogh Roith: Please, please can you read WP:INDENT and learn to add one colon more than the previous poster at the start of your post? Also, can you stop making every sentenced into a separate paragraph? Scolaire (talk) 18:27, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Hey Scolaire already replied to you on my talk page @18.21. You may have missed that but no worries. Btw I'm not hitting return after every sentence. I'm using a mobile device. If it keeps happening let me know and I'll change to another device. Thanks Mogh Roith (talk) 18:48, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your previous reply regarding concensus Scolaire. I'm in agreement with you that there hasn't been concensus on this issue to date. As per that wiki link where concensus and I quote "Consensus on Wikipedia does not mean unanimity (which is ideal but not always achievable), nor is it the result of a vote. Decision making and reaching consensus involve an effort to incorporate all editors' legitimate concerns, while respecting Wikipedia's policies and guidelines". The points raised by me in this particular article are that the term "British isles" as used in the context of the article is A) unnecessary B) divisive. With the exception of one reply as far as I can see neither of those two legitimate concerns have been actually addressed. I'm saying they should be, because the issues on this page that I've and others have detailed will continue to arise here otherwise. Mogh Roith (talk) 19:57, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Yes, they will keep arising. As long as any other term is in common use. And then we will have an endless series of requests to turn it back to the old term, because the new term is offensive and divisive. A no win situation, talk page-wise. The Banner talk 21:04, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

So far, your arguments have amounted to nothing more than "use of the term 'British Isles' is a) unnecessary, and b) divisive." This article is a geographic article. It is absolutely perfectly normal and usual practice to describe geographical features and entities as "biggest", "smallest", "tallest", "longest", etc., and to compare them in size (length, distance, etc.) to other nearby entities. Look at the first line of the article. Click in to the links. "Ireland is an article in the North Atlantic Ocean (first line of that article says "The Atlantic Ocean is the second-largest of the world's five oceans")... It is separated from Great Britain (second sentence of that article states "it is the largest of the British Isles, the largest European island, and the ninth-largest in the world")." Similarly on many, many geographical articles across the encyclopedia. Look at Jamaica: "it is the third-largest island of the Greater Antilles and the Caribbean (after Cuba and Hispaniola)"; See also Honshu; K2; Errigal; the River Shannon. Etc. Etc. Etc. This is something we do. We will not stop because one person thinks it's "unnecessary." It's not. It gives very useful context to readers. Second issue: It's "divisive." Frankly, /shrug. Some people don't like the term. We recognise that, and write about it. But. The term is still widely used. In Ireland, as well as in Britain, and the rest of the world. We don't avoid terms or content or articles because they're divisive. We just don't. In fact, if something is divisive, it means it's generally got lots of good, reliable sources, because people are writing about it. Wikipedia is written from a neutral point of view. We strive for articles in an impartial tone that document and explain major points of view, giving due weight for their prominence. is one of our five pillars. So no, we won't avoid use of the term because it's "divisive." If you have a better argument to make - ideally one that hasn't been made before - then fine, consensus may change. But so far, you've not done that, and yes, your arguments do sound a lot like WP:IDIDNOTHEARTHAT. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 22:15, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Well no logic that doesn't hold up. As already detailed above, a straightforward change of the current text, not using the current term or indeed any specific term is suggested. The reason because - no term is actually necessary to convey the ideas detailed in that sentence. We already know the term currently used is considered divisive see. British_Isles_naming_dispute and various archives here. Changing the sentence, to using neutral language solves both issues and would also provide a solution to what you refer to as an "endless series of requests" Mogh Roith (talk) 23:12, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

No, as I said before a few times: Wikipedia follows the common use of a term. It is not a vanguard in promoting a term. And certainly the encyclopedia is not a forum to invent a new term that suits your taste. The Banner talk 09:05, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

As already detailed many times here, no-one here is promoting any alternative term. Btw I'm also aware of the common use of a term via wiki's guidelines. However the term is certainly not the only common term used to describe these islands. A quick check on google trends for Ireland shows that for as far back as records go on google - the terms "Britain and Ireland" and "British isles" are close to neck on neck with regard to online searches . Regardless of that, the point remains it seems that you're arguing beside the point I made and are replacing it with something else. To reiterate - there is no need to employ any common terms in order to detail the size difference relative to the two islands. And where that solution also helps to prevent the division that the use of that term causes and continues to cause, then that's to the good of article in question Mogh Roith (talk) 12:10, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Bastun. Yes they're the two points made and as I've detailed few have addressed those specific issues so far. Btw there's no issue with anything or any place being described as biggest, longest, shortest etc. And nowhere has it been suggested that's an issue. So I'm going to disregard that part of your comment. What is apparently unnecessary in the context of this article is the use of the term "British Isles", which is already noted as being generally divisive in the naming-dispute article, and here specifically using the term in the main article about Ireland. And btw I checked with google trends and the term is not particularly widely used in the UK, where terms such as Great Britain and Britain are all used much more frequently. I note you refer to "neutral points of view" and "an impartial tone that document and explain points of view". That's the point. The inclusion of the phrase is not considered neutral nor impartial by many people in Ireland. And that is already detailed in the naming_dispute article. Nor is any point of view in relation to the term explained. Another comment here stated that "I would question whether the use British Isles" in reference to island sizes adds sufficient value to the article to warrant it's inclusion". I would agree with that and suggest that a simple change in the text would be the best solution, because to put it simply, it isn't necessary to use the term within the context of the current article. Yes the term is widely deemed divisive (and its not just me saying that) and I believe its use in the current article is unnecessary and can be replaced with other text to make the same point about size etc. Considering that most of the replies to-date haven't addressed the points made, I can just as easily redirect your link to "Failure or refusal to "get the point" back at those replies. Mogh Roith (talk) 00:14, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

I give up. I would, however, suggest you have a read of WP:1AM and then maybe consider dropping the stick and backing slowly away from the horse carcass. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 09:28, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for that bastun. The analogy doesn't hold though. The issue remains that I'm only one of many who have raised these specific issues here. Those issues are not going to go away and will unfortunately continue to arise, especially where there is a blind insistence that those issues somehow don't matter, despite those very issues repeatedly coming to the fore on this very talk page. And to quote the wiki consensus page "consensus on Wikipedia does not mean unanimity (which is ideal but not always achievable), nor is it the result of a vote. Decision making and reaching consensus involve an effort to incorporate all editors legitimate concerns, while respecting Wikipedia's policies and guidelines". Unfortunately this discussion has not even got close to that imho. But hey that's where were at I guess. Mogh Roith (talk) 12:24, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 October 2023

Ireland have made the rugby World Cup quarterfinals 8 times, not six as is stated in culture/sports section. AedanOKelly (talk) 10:21, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. SeoR (talk) 11:53, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Done Boardwalk.Koi (talk) 15:12, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Ireland naming discussions

Per WP:ARCA#Motion: Ireland article names - Required location of move discussions rescinded, discussions on Ireland article names no longer have to take place at WT:IECOLL. In future, they can take place on article talk pages. Scolaire (talk) 13:20, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

http://publications.europa.eu/code/en/en-370100.htm

NB:

Do not use ‘Republic of Ireland’. Although this name is found in some documents, it does not have official status. 86.120.171.235 (talk) 05:37, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Head on island image

Why is there a green head in the first image? Located south of Kintyre and Arran in Scotland, top-right. DankJae 23:27, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Oh. My. God!!! Has that really been like that for 10 years?!?!?!? I don't see any edits to the file in that time. Canterbury Tail talk 23:46, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

I put it back to the proper version of that file. It looks like it was vandalised here and no one noticed. Canterbury Tail talk 23:51, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

@Canterbury Tail, No it was recent, per that edit (probabaly good faith tho), thanks, weirded me out when I noticed that there shouldn't be an island there. DankJae 00:46, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

It's the image itself that has been on Wikipedia/Commons for 10+ years. It's just odd that the editor in question replaced it on multiple articles, and on multiple wikis. Canterbury Tail talk 11:21, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Ah right. DankJae 14:30, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Nominated the silly version for deletion. The Banner talk 16:27, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

And it's gone already. Scolaire (talk) 16:50, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Etymology of "Ireland"

The current Etymology section appears to describe a folk etymology, or at the very least a less popular proposal than the mainstream one, which is that the name of Ireland descends from the Proto-Celtic *ɸīweriyū (meaning "fat/fertile/arable earth"), which is also the origin of the Graeco-Roman "Hibernia", still used as a poetic name for Ireland. I accordingly tried to correct the etymology section, even acommodating the possibility that the name of the goddess Ériu influenced the name of the island, even though all evidence points to it having been the other way around, but my edits were instead reverted under "original research" despite me using reputable dictionaries. The etymology I put forward is the mainstream one and is even cited on the Éire page, so I think this was just a reflexive revert to prevent vandalism, which I completely understand, but still, we should probably change the Etymology section. Pescavelho (talk) 21:44, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

In my view, dictionaries are not good enough sources for etymology. Do you have other sources that back up your claims? The Banner talk 22:33, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Dictionaries are tertiary sources, but so are encyclopedias, such as the one cited as the (only) source in the current etymology section. As long as these aforementioned dictionaries cite their sources I don't see the issue. What would you consider "good enough sources for etymology", if not dictionaries, which admitedly, are prone to mistakes and folk etymologies as well? Linguistics papers? Several of those will back the etymology I've provided and I can cite them. Pescavelho (talk) 12:41, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

@Pescavelho: You cite two rather obscure sources (Stüber, Karin, The Historical Morphology of n-Stems in Celtic, and Zair, Nicholas, The reflexes of the Proto-Indo-European laryngeals in Celtic) to support your argument; these could hardly be described as "the mainstream". Can you cite something a little more authoritative that corroborates these two, and in particular, that shows that scholarly consensus is that the Ériu origin is plain wrong? The most recent thing you've read is not necessarily the new truth. Scolaire (talk) 11:43, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

As aforementioned, the Éire page already mentions this etymology, and includes three sources: Koch, John T., Celtic Culture: A Historical Encyclopedia; Mallory, J.P. and D.Q. Adams, ed. Encyclopedia of Indo-European Culture; and an archive of the University of Wales' Proto-Celtic Lexicon.
I'll flip this question back onto you. Are there any good sources that describe the origin of the island's name coming from the name for the goddess and not the other way around? The current source on this page is from The Encyclopedia of Medieval Literature in Britain, which is a tertiary source. One of the sources said encyclopedia cites, Isaac, G.R. A Note on the Name of Ireland in Irish and Welsh, mentions the etymology I've provided, and while the author then goes on to (not conclusively) suggest it is more likely it comes from a different Proto-Celtic toponym, indeed ultimately derived from PIE *h2uer, it makes no mention of the name of the island being derived from the name of the goddess; in the page for the republic of Ireland, a tourism site is cited, hardly an authoritative figure. Pescavelho (talk) 12:41, 4 April 2024 (UTC)