From eRepublik Official Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Irish Region Pages

The Regions of Ireland section looks really good! Are you going to build pages for each region or city? --Q J Lincoln 03:15, 26 August 2008 (BST)

All of the Irish region pages need serious updating. I'll do it if I get some time. Any help would be much appreciated.
--Starks Hayter 12:07, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


Separate article dealing with the history? --Reprah 18:45, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

The IDF, regions and history sections are slowly being taken care of. --Harrilal 22:59, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Structure Update

I adjusted the structure to be like the one I developed over a year for the UK page.

I found that all country pages share similar features but have quite random categories, organization and ordering. I tried to use some logic for the country page style and matched it to the tabs listed ingame on the country page, other improvements include having contact info such as IRC and Forums at the TOP of the page rather than the bottom.

This is designed to be more friendly for new players.

I can appreciate that I made a big edit and in my enthusiasm I didn't list the changes on the talk page, however previous edits and the revert haven't been discussed either. I feel that reverting ALL of my changes and then slandering me on the page as a "PTO" is quite unfair, especially as I spend a lot of time on it.

Can I remind Ian E Coleman that no individuals own these pages and to consider that I made the edit in good faith. I will revert back to my edit and include as many of the changes Ian has made afterwards, pending more discussion.

Could we discuss the merits of both page structures and reach a consensus? --Goku Jones 15:58, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

When I saw the edit, I thought it was quite a good adjustment to the page tbh. It's less cluttered, better organised, and the images thumbnailed to the side were thankfully removed. - John F Baker Icon-UK.png Talk/Royal Navy 17:12, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
This is not a structure update. This is an attempt to censor the official wiki of another country. I'm frankly disappointed that John F Baker would condone this. The fact that the PTOers have had their affiliation changed to Bremen_Clubhouse is incriminating, as is the content of the wiki page relating to that group. I will do everything in my power (be it little I can do) to stop this kind of blatant vandalism and corruption. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ian E Coleman (talkcontribs) 01:08, March 30, 2011
I think the fact that you're bringing ingame things into the unconnected and neutral conditions of wiki talk pages is the real disappointment. What the hell are you talking about, PTOing? I said it's a good structural edit, because frankly, it is.
Explain how this is:
  • corruption;
  • vandalism;
  • censorship.
Considering this is a discussion between three wiki editors, as opposed to "UK AND IRELAND11!!!", don't get all defensive for petty reasons; a little maturity would be nice. - John F Baker Icon-UK.png Talk/Royal Navy 22:21, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Jay Baykara, I know that you've made huge contributions to the wiki. I don't believe that I can go over your head on this. But I'm not unaware of what's going on here.

The wiki and the game are innately related. The wiki serves the game, so how can they be unconnected? And neutral conditions only exist as long as they are upheld by the user, which here I feel they are not.

I've looked over the Policies and I can see I'm in a corner here.

It seems like this edit only serves to change some design and replace a lot of my own personal edits with older edits that I myself also wrote. I don't have time to pick through the whole thing right now, but there are reasons for the pages previous design, and I would appreciate some explanation of these newly implemented changes. I also don't know what the problem would have been with thumbnails. Is this something to do with wiki policy? Or just personal opinion? That isn't rhetoric it's a real question.

Tell me what the criteria is for a PTO group, and I will provide evidence that those who allowed Goku Jones citizenship to Ireland belonged to a PTO group. Articles and wiki pages written by many members of the Bremen Clubhouse don't hide their intentions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ian E Coleman (talkcontribs) 01:47, March 30, 2011

I really don't see how Goku may or may not being in the BCH has anything to do with a non-trolling edit, that in your own words only "change[s] some design".
The thumbnails made it look cluttered, and they were pretty irrelevant: e.g the "Democracy" one.
Stop acting like some cornered rabbit :/ - John F Baker Icon-UK.png Talk/Royal Navy 06:28, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Why is Goku suddenly interested in the Irish wiki? If you were familiar with the page before and after the edits you would see that this was not an improvement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ian E Coleman (talkcontribs) 20:10, March 30, 2011
Ian, can you PLEASE sign your posts using the signature/timestamp tool? It is difficult to read this discussion. I would appreciate it if you went back and labeled all of your posts here.
I already discussed the structure improvements I made, mainly benefiting us by using the INGAME categories and putting links/media further up the page for newbie friendliness.
Example: Media is now right near the top in the Society group, one of the first things a new player will see. It is not right at the bottom of the page.
I have not censored anything as I haven't changed the content. The only thing I took down were real life pictures which violate the policy of no fictional content on main pages (they are fictional in the context of this game, wikipedia has the real life stuff).
The page must be written from a neutral POV Ian, you can't have a "Don't vote for" PTO list on the page. You can write about it but it has to be a neutral 3rd party POV.
--Goku Jones 17:22, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

The wiki is here to inform players about the game. The government of Ireland has a list of individuals it considers PTOers. This is a neutral POV, that information should be included on the page because it is relevant and important when talking about Ireland. The only reason you removed it was because it reduced the chances of uneducated citizens voting for PTOers if they saw that list. I'm not the one who is failing to represent neutrality. Inherently, you are the one who is placing your own bias on the page.

I think the media section is pretty irrelevant since important articles will already appear in the news feed, that's why I already had it at the bottom. Most of those papers, although official government papers, will hardly ever publish articles. I just put it there months ago to replace an outdated list of top public newspapers. I can see the merit of putting the IRC, Dictionary, Forum higher up, I'll admit that. But I actually find this page much more difficult to understand because the new icons don't match, and there aren't any of the pictures to help mark certain areas. The giant thumbnail of the Dail used to be a good way to mark the government area. It looked more like a wikipedia page before in my opinion, and it was a lot easier to read and more informative. I'm fairly certain you have replaced content with older content. You have made significant changes. I just don't understand why these changes are necessary. Why does Ireland's wiki need to look more like the wiki for the UK? --Ian E Coleman 22:08, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

The issue here seems to me that you want ownership of the page? Is this correct?
This isn't about making the page look like the UK one (others are like it, such as Japan). It's about finding the best possible format which can be applied to ALL country pages. Each country has something slightly different, seemingly picked at random. I'm trying to apply some logic to it as previously explained.
Issues mentioned:
  • The icons should match the in game ones, this needs correcting.
  • Wildcards also NEED to be added to the congress table.
  • Government newspapers are usually full of useful info and guides no matter how old they are, useless ones should be removed though!
  • The index at the top is for finding sections, pictures; especially random IRL ones don't really serve this purpose? This isn't wikipedia so I don't think we need information about real life Ireland which isn't relevant to the game, such as what a tall ship in dublin looks like, a giant bank note, or a random poster with democracy written on it.
Please do write a neutral POV PTO section, but the previous version was written from your personal POV. For such a delicate matter you need to consider and explain both sides of the story and have proof that each person is indeed in BCH.
--Goku Jones 22:39, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
It's not a delicate matter. Anyone can see that you're at least associated with BCH, you're denying it is a technicality. I don't want ownership of this page, the only reason you said that was in an attempt to make me more angry that I already am. This page doesn't belong to anyone, but that doesn't mean that anything is acceptable. I may be one of the only people in Ireland who pays much attention to the wiki, but that is a side-effect of the small population we have.
I've also been given the task of trying to improve all of the wiki's that relate to Ireland. It's hard for me to ensure that is happening when this kind of careless overhauling is going on. Most brand new citizens wouldn't be this cavalier about dictating what's appropriate and what isn't for an entire eNation. And if RL pictures aren't allowed, than why is the real life anthem? This entire situation is riddled with double standards.
---Ian E Coleman 22:51, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
The anthem is part of the template so it's inclusion isn't down to me, it doesn't take up any space anyway (pictures on the other hand are very intrusive). I guess that players can feel represented by music, flags, avatars, pictures etc.
Perhaps more appropriate pictures could be included which are related to eRepublik and eIreland?
I'm not stopping you from making edits, I've just objected to you reverting mine and then adding my name to the page as a "PTO" without evidence. BCH have released articles which prove certain things, ie. their number and intentions. So a paragraph on this could be reasonable as long as people aren't blanket added without evidence.
I'd prefer to talk about individual points on how we can improve the structure and maybe even move towards making a country template, rather than broad statements such as "this edit is careless".
--Goku Jones 22:58, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
BY THE WAY - Here are some examples of Countries where you will have to go in an remove previous content to conform to your arbitrary vision.
These are some quick examples. Please mess around with the wiki's of these countries and see how they re-act. When they revert the page or complain about it, will it be their fault for thinking that the page belonged to them? Or will it be your fault for thinking that the wiki belonged to you.
And I'll give you the anthem, but why can't a person feel represented by a picture? As a RL Canadian, I do feel national pride when I see the Parliament Buildings. It's no different than a flag or an athem, which can mean the same, more, or less. I'm all for templates, but a template doesn't dictate how the rest of the page will be organized. It doesn't tell you whether pictures are intrusive. That's your subjective opinion. If it were possible, I'd like to get some actual citizens to decide which is easier to read. But at the moment it's just you and me arguing about it, and it's hardly worth it since you've got things the way you want them.
I am willing to work with you. But not if I believe you don't have good intentions. And I don't need proof that you're a PTOer. The proof is that the government says you are, and you were given citizenship by Tomazim. That's not related to the wiki, but that's the reason I can't trust you.
In the meantime this whole thing is preventing me from my citizen page program.
---Ian E Coleman 22:51, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
I never said that a person can't be represented by a picture. I said that the pictures used where not really relevant to anything, such as the picture of a ship in a harbour.
All of those countries have a totally random structure which kind proves my point, they could all be converted to the in game format with minimal work and NO deletions - but I don't have time to maintain so many pages.
We are discussing the totally wrong things again. Why not discuss how we can improve the page, such as "section X needs to be a Y because..."
--Goku Jones 17:21, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Well some of the pictures you removed were of the Dail. The ship was actually in the harbour of Dublin the capital of Ireland. And the democracy picture wasn't relevant other that that it was in an area that talked about elections. I'll give you the last one, but I'm annoyed that everything else was deleted. Also annoyed that the historical documents formatting is now gone. The idea was to attract attention to related historical records that were very interesting. You still have the links now, but they are much easier to overlook. Most of what's in those historical documents used to be included on the Irish page, but was created in a new location to help make the page more readable. And it's annoying if the page is laid out so that you need to go to the top of the page to figure out where you are. When you're not looking at the index it's not very user friendly. Pictures provide visual bookmarks for important information as well as making the page more attractive and interesting.
If you ask me the template needs to be re-looked at because I don't think it's incredibly functional.
--Ian E Coleman 19:01, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
The "main article" feature is standard wiki formatting. --Goku Jones 19:59, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
I'm saying it needs to be reconsidered. I've put the two versions of the page to a vote on the Irish forum to see which is actually the most effective version. --Ian E Coleman 20:01, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

I have decided to continue work on this page with these the changes by Goku Jones. While I still believe that the original version was superior, the changes made recently at least make it bearable. I will be closely monitoring the page, and we will need to closely discuss changes from this point on. I have to begrudgingly admit that Goku has put some good work into this, as much as I still have misgivings about his interests and attention to this page. I already have some concerns to talk about.

  • 1. The Bremen Clubhouse reference and use as a political party. I'm not sure if this is appropriate, though I'm tempted not to challenge it since it helps raise awareness about this PTO group. On the other hand it actually isn't a political party, and it may only serve to legitimize, advertise, and glorify this group.
  • 2. Wildcards in congress - Do we want to combine these groups like this? Wildcards aren't full congress are they?
  • 3. Solidarity Union - I'm not sure if I had removed this group from the original wiki, but removal needs to be considered because this group isn't exactly a government union anymore, and given recent changes to the economic module, it's going through a re-forming stage.
  • 4. Alliances section - I detect some slight UK bias here.

I think that's all for now. --Ian E Coleman 01:56, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Wildcards ARE full congress so I fixed it. I'm bound to write alliance history with a slight UK bias as that is the country I was in at the time, not much I can do about that. The way wikis work is that you then come in with your slight Irish bias and they cancel out into a neutral article. --Goku Jones 09:45, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

How to deal with Bremen Clubhouse

This is an organization with congress seats in Ireland. My solution was to add "and organizations" to the description of the party list to add this information on Irish congressmen.

There may be a better way to handle this, but plastering "BRITISH UNOFFICIAL" over it is neither elegant or neutral. --Goku Jones 16:39, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

They are British, and they are unofficial. How is it not neutral. And "elegant" is sort of vague, could you be more specific. I don't see a problem with the way it was before. --Ian E Coleman 21:08, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
Alot of people in eIreland are American. Is there a specific need to reference people's IRL or former ingame nationalities?
If you want to talk about the perceived PTO attempt by BCH, write a paragraph about it for the politics section from a neutral POV.
--Goku Jones 22:06, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
"Alot of people in eIreland are American. Is there a specific need to reference people's IRL or former ingame nationalities?" - That actually is made reference to on the page - along with a list of other expatriot groups. --Ian E Coleman 11:14, 20 April 2011 (PDT)

Ireland's "Neutrality"

Edits have referenced Ireland's so called neutrality many times. I'm not sure if I agree with this assertion because although Ireland hasn't been in alliance groups for a long time, we haven't been completely uninvolved in alliances with other countries or excluded from interest or being effected by alliance groups. Ireland has been heavily involved in EDEN since October 2010. --Ian E Coleman 21:18, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Ireland was neutral before it joined Brolliance, a significant portion of eIreland's history. I believe that this is what the neutral comments reference.--Goku Jones 22:06, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
The Use of the word "recently" is inadequate. Ireland has been heavily involved in alliance military politics since I started playing this game in September. --Ian E Coleman 20:47, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
Depends on how old of a player you are. Change the word "recently" it if it bothers you.--Goku Jones 22:56, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
I think the wiki should present the most useful current information. Telling people that Ireland hasn't been involved in many alliance situations is misleading. --- I've also updated the expatriate groups to be in alphabetical order by nation title (not citizenship term). This is to avoid any bias implicit in the order of the list. --Ian E Coleman 21:04, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
Neutral, Brolliance then EDEN. Seems fairly simple to me. Do you want us to strip all history sections out? I put the expats in reading alphabetical order, it doesn't make sense to do it by the alphabetical order of the links as nobody can see those.--Goku Jones 11:37, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
Whatever. The point of alphabetical order was not for reading purposes, it was for the sake of eliminating bias inherent in the order of the list. Since your change was pointless, I could change it back, but it really doesn't matter. Btw, I removed Eire Aonair since that party no longer exists formally. --Ian E Coleman 22:30, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
Neither way has bias. It just looks odd to have alphabetical order that isn't in alphabetical order.--Goku Jones 23:28, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
Agreed, either method of alphabetical order is fine. I don't think it looked odd before, but if you did that's fine. --Ian E Coleman 11:30, 19 April 2011 (PDT)

Reverting constructive edits

We still have a problem with people reverting my constructive edits because they don't seem to like me ingame. Why did Chance Harrison revert, without discussion, two edits I made? One was adding an absent irish military unit and the other was adding the new occupied region template discussed in the bar.--Goku Jones 03:54, 19 June 2011 (PDT)

Due to your latest reverting you now have 7 days to discuss about what next edit will be without fear of no one editing the page during the time or reverting any edits. Here's some matters you need to reach a consensus:
  1. Do you use {{Tl|Occupied at the page or not;
  2. How many citizens are there in Ireland;
  3. How many members your military units have;
  4. Is Labour's Army and Bremen Clubhouse military units of Ireland;

And so on. Better start right away! --Icon-Finland.png sampo555 | Talk 23:06, 19 June 2011 (PDT)

The current version tracks occupied regions, I just changed it from the manual version to the automatically updated version made by VSkyzv. Why did this need to be reverted?
Black and Tans is an Irish Military unit, you can see this ingame although the name is currently bugged to just Black. Again why was this military unit removed and attempts to put it back in reverted?
The population figures were reverted when I undid the revert of my additions. I think that it is more reasonable to lose a handful of easily updatable numbers than me put entire sections of code back only to have it reverted again.
Could someone explain what exactly I am doing wrong? Senior editors continue to call me childish when all I am doing is adding good and neutral edits to this page. I am happy to talk about any dispute here, I am after all using the talk pages. --Goku Jones 12:54, 20 June 2011 (PDT)
I would use Occupied template at the page. I agree that all Irish military units should be added to this page in order to avoid these kind of conflicts. I can't say what Mikhail had on his mind when he left the message to your talk page but I can say that your edits seem to be OK. In my opinion Chance Harrison is the childish person in this case (for reverting your edits only because your "TO'er"). Your actually doing pretty good work. Page has now been unprotected and I hope that I don't see any reverts in the Irish page after today (you both have been warned). --Icon-Finland.png sampo555 | Talk 13:12, 20 June 2011 (PDT)

Childish? Black and Tans or "Black" are not a MU in eIreland nor does the Irish government including the Minister of Defence recognize them as such. If they were they would certainly answer to the MoD and not troll the MoDs orders. But I'm childish....what do I know? Labour's Army is an MU in eIreland. Bremen Club House "paramilitary wing" is not. It's British. I change the citizen numbers regularly to reflect ingame fluxuations. I can do it on a weekly basis if need be more less changes. Miltary members numbers change as well. Way to stay neutral Sampo. --Icon-Ireland.png Chance Harrison | Talk 11:34 20 June 2011 (EST)

This article is about Ireland, the ingame country, not Ireland from the perspective of the official Irish government. John F. Baker Icon-UK.png (Talk | Contribs) 23:34, 20 June 2011 (PDT)

Is the link I provided wrong? Black (and Tans) IS on the Irish MU page. Now with current events, this page is going to need lots of updating. Can we come to an agreement on how we can update? I suggest that we agree to forbid reverts unless there is vandalism or a major code issue ruining the page. Also I suggest that if you don't like what someone has written you discuss it here and EDIT what they have put to be more neutral rather than deleting everything?--Goku Jones 04:15, 21 June 2011 (PDT)

Ok, this is your last warning now. If you revert each others edits again, I'll be protecting this page and all edits will need to be posted to be in-game via for me to approve and edit myself. I can't stand for bullshit and this is gone too far. Chance, this army is a military unit in Ireland, therefore it is Irish, it doesn't matter if they are all British. It is a military unit in Ireland. -- Icon-Germany.pngIcon-Vietnam.png Mikhail Alexander 04:35, 21 June 2011 (PDT)
I find the childishness that I see on my watchlist constantly, quite ridiculous. *sigh* John F. Baker Icon-UK.png (Talk | Contribs) 06:10, 21 June 2011 (PDT)
The Bremen Clubhouse and their affiliates are without a doubt a bunch of racist, intentionally offensive, abusive trolls. What is childish was the creation of a military unit in Ireland in the first place called "Black and Tans" (if you don't know why that's offensive look it up on actual wikipedia). I've learned to compromise since Goku does technically stay within his rights on the wiki, but cut Chance some slack given what the Bremen Clubhouse are. I'm not even RL Irish and I'm offended. It's obvious to anyone with first hand knowledge, that these edit disputes are between editors who are really trying to improve the wiki, but struggle with the frustrating rules, and editors who play the rules to offend others. --Ian E Coleman 13:27, 21 June 2011 (PDT)
Then report it ingame. Perhaps that is why the name is "bugged"? We could just put the top 5 parties/military units in if you only want major groups on the main page. I think that is an example of a more suitable thing to discuss rather than auto reverting my edits. Can we agree to cease reverts so that I can update the page, or will everything need to be discussed on the talk page (nobody has objected to the auto updating regions - can that go in?)?--Goku Jones 13:49, 21 June 2011 (PDT)
I never reverted anything. I'm just trying to keep this page fair and truthful. --Ian E Coleman 12:15, 23 June 2011 (PDT)