Talk:Provisional Government of Ireland (1922)

The 'provisional' in the 'Provisional Government'

The status and authority of this 'Provisional' administration was disputed from its inception. It should be noted that the perspective of this article is very much biased towards a particular view of Irish history and constitutional development. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RashersTierney (talk • contribs) 23:18, 17 August 2008 (UTC) RashersTierney (talk) 23:23, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Title

"Provisional Government of Southern Ireland" was not its name. The Treaty made reference to "the provisional Government of Southern Ireland" (small "p"), but did not say that that was to be its designation. If I do a Google Books search on "Provisional Government of Southern Ireland", taking out phrases from the Treaty, I get 23 results on 3 pages, three of which are not books (House of Commons debates or contemporary newspapers). Of the actual books, only four can be shown to actually contain the search term, "Provisional Government of Southern Ireland", one of which has it in scare quotes, one in square brackets, and one an "e-Study Guide" probably taken from Wikipedia, leaving a grand total of one book which can be considered a reliable source for the use of that designation in practice. Searching for "Provisional government of the irish free state", surpisingly, I only get 21 results, but the first seven of those are notable history books. "Provisional government of Ireland" requires you to add "1922", because there was an earlier Fenian one. It gives 23 results, but again, some of them are House of Commons debates, several refer to something called the "Provisional Government of Ireland Committee", not to the government itself, and a couple use it as a translation of Rialtas Seadalach na hÉireann which was printed on stamps, so there are only five books – and not all of them good history books – that say that that was its designation. The balance of the reliable history sources, therefore, is "Provisional Government of the Irish Free State", and I propose to move the article to that title. Scolaire (talk) 18:07, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

I agree with the proposed move. Btw, should it be a wikipedia move request? Snappy (talk) 08:27, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

I don't think so. RM is for potentially controversial moves. I posted the above over two months ago and nobody seems to have even seen it until I drew your attention to it last night, so I don't see any potential controversy. Scolaire (talk) 09:43, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

And very clearly this is, and always was, a potentially controversial move. Actually, WP:RM is for all moves except the completely uncontroversial - it is the default. Johnbod (talk) 08:04, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and done the move, and fixed the incoming links. Scolaire (talk) 11:21, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

The wording of the Treaty is unambiguous (Art. 15):

the provisional Government of Southern Ireland hereinafter constituted...

It does not matter if others have described the Government in question inaccurately or not. I suppose this needs broader input from other editors. The change in the article name should be reverted. It was at that name for years and for good reason. Frenchmalawi (talk) 22:50, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Extract from Wikipedia:Requested Moves

Anyone can be bold and move a page without discussing it first and gaining an explicit consensus on the talk page. If you consider such a move to be [[../#Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves|controversial]], and the new title has not been in place for a long time, you may revert the move. If you can not revert the move for technical reasons then you may [[../#Requesting technical moves|request a technical move]].

Move wars are disruptive, so if you make a bold move and it is reverted, do not make the move again. Instead, follow the procedures laid out in [[../#CM|§ Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves]].

Ignoring Wikipedia:Requested Moves is not acceptable

User:Scolaire made a bold move. He moved the title of the article without discussing it at Wikipedia:Requested Moves. I reverted his move. He then disregarded the above guidance and reverted again to his chosen new title. This is a violation of the above procedure. I will again revert the move and if Scolaire wishes to revert to his controversial move, he must raise this for discussion at Wikipedia:Requested Moves. To do otherwise is a breach of all the rules. Frenchmalawi (talk) 23:17, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

I agree with the move, we should use the actual name not a political overlay. I think that makes three for one against ----Snowded ^TALK 06:54, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Take it to WP:RM. The actual title in the treaty seems correct. Johnbod (talk) 08:04, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Except it's not the title in the Treaty. Note the small "p". The few words quoted above were taken from a long section dealing with talks between the two governments, North and South, not with the setting up of the PG, still less its name. If the Treaty meant to name the government, it would have said, "The provisional government shall be styled 'The Provisional Government of...'" It didn't, and in fact the Provisional Government was never styled anything but "the Provisional Government". Scolaire (talk) 08:31, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Process debate

I suggest we abandon the process debate without resolution and go straight to the substantive debate. I have added a RM notice below and hopefully can merge the autogenerated section with this one. @Frenchmalawi: your second revert was of the content rather than the name, so now we have a mismatch. If an admin wants to move the page back and replace my RM above with another in the opposite direction I will not mind. jnestorius^(talk) 10:34, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Substantive debate

I suggest we move it to Provisional Government (Ireland) (or Provisional Government (Ireland, 1922) to exclude earlier republican gestures). This avoids plumping for one of the contested variants. The article section Name of Provisional Government should inform any debate; that section could be improved in any case. There are numerous possibilities:

1. names in UK law and official documents (I find it interesting that a document signed "Provisional Government of Ireland Committee of the Cabinet" is catalogued as "Provisional Government of Southern Ireland")
2. names in Irish law and official documents
3. names used in 1922 by supporters, opponents, media
4. names used in 2015 by historians

While all these are worth discussing in the article, I think #4 is most relevant for WP:COMMONNAME. I think Scolaire's survey does not establish that "Provisional Government of the Irish Free State" is sufficiently predominant. Incidentally, the Irish Free State existed in fact and in Irish law months before its Constitution came into effect. In Irish law, the Supreme Court in Reade [1927] I.R. 31 and Performing Right Society v Bray U.D.C. [1928] I.R. 512 gave 31 March 1922 (the Irish Free State (Agreement) Act 1922) as the latest date by which the state existed de jure. The "Free State forces" were already fighting the Civil War. The word "Provisional" is in the government's title precisely because its constitutional underpinnings were not in place. jnestorius^(talk) 10:34, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Fine with that, including the date, or say Provisional Government of Ireland (1922) or even Provisional Government of Ireland in 1922 Johnbod (talk) 10:23, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 7 April 2015

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Closed for procedural reasons. I have already requested this move at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests‎, in the "revert undiscussed moves" section. It should be uncontroversial to undo the move, after whcih those supporting it can then (if they wish) open a formal RM to go from Provisional Government of Southern Ireland → Provisional Government of the Irish Free State. If that technical request fails for some reason, then this formal RM can be reopened, but until then we should list in just one place. (non-admin closure)  — Amakuru (talk) 11:40, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

---

Provisional Government of the Irish Free State → Provisional Government of Southern Ireland – Contesting a previous move. jnestorius^(talk) 10:34, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

See previous section. Note that I don't support the name Provisional Government of Southern Ireland, I am the nominator only in a formal sense. jnestorius^(talk) 11:35, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 8 April 2015

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved to Provisional Government of Ireland (1922) - Clearly there are multiple alternative names for this article, all of which have flaws in some way and there was no clear consensus around any single name but neither was there much support for retaining the current title. Adjust content accordingly and give due deference to RS that suggest viable alternative names. Thanks to Otr500 for the cogent summary at the end of the discussion and to everyone who provided for an interesting and civil debate on this. Mike Cline (talk) 10:23, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

---

Provisional Government of Southern Ireland → ? – Southern Ireland is not the usual name and is misleading. jnestorius^(talk) 09:45, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

• Comment see #Title section above. I think Provisional Government (Ireland) is the best option, with a hatnote to Provisional Government of Ireland (disambiguation) (or to Provisional Government of Ireland if that name ought to show the dab rather than redirect to this 1922 article) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jnestorius (talk • contribs) 10:13, 8 April 2015
• It should include the date, especially given the potential confusion "Provisional" may create in an Irish context. Provisional Government (Ireland, 1922), or say Provisional Government of Ireland (1922) or even Provisional Government of Ireland in 1922 Johnbod (talk) 10:25, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
• Tentative oppose - I actually think that the current title is not too bad, it does a better job than many others of satisfying WP:NATURAL and WP:PRECISE. Yes, I agree that this was officially just the "Provisional Government", and also that the current title is not necessarily in massive common use, but it does describe exactly what the entity was, bearing in mind that the entity later known as Irish Free State, and now as Republic of Ireland, was at the time in question correctly titled "Southern Ireland". An alternative would be "Provisional Government (Southern Ireland)", but you lose the naturalness there. "Provisional Government (Ireland)" I'm not keen on, as it carries a connotation of applying to the North, which it clearly did not. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 10:40, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
• Move to Provisional Government of the Irish Free State. Naming an executive based on a few words taken out of context from a treaty is original research. No reliable, modern, secondary source explicitly names it the "Provisional Government of Southern Ireland". At least a dozen modern, reliable books or articles (listed in the Discussion section below) explicitly name it as the "Provisional Government of the Irish Free State". Scolaire (talk) 11:45, 8 April 2015 (UTC) Failing that, Move to "Provisional Government of Ireland (1922)" per Johnbod and The initializer. Scolaire (talk) 11:03, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
• Support. The Anglo-Irish Treaty also refers to a "Government of Northern Ireland." Despite the lawyerly overcapitalizing, this has never been understood as a proper name. It's simply a reference to whoever is running things in the North. This Michael Collins obit describes him as leader of the "Provisional Government" and of the "Irish Free State." Here (bottom of the second column) is an example of de Valera berating "the persons styling themselves as the provisional government of southern Ireland." Clearly, PGSI was not a complimentary way to describe the Collins government. As far as how the article should be renamed, the common name appears to be "Provisional Government," although that is too ambiguous to serve as an article title. I support Provisional Government of Ireland (1922), as Johnbod suggests above. This is written up as a regime article, but the period is more commonly viewed as a phase of the Irish Free State (1922-1937). Contemporary newspaper accounts call the Dublin government "Ireland" or "Irish Free State" from the time of the Anglo-Irish Treaty onward. The initializer (talk) 03:07, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
• Move to Provisional Government of the Irish Free State - per Scolaire. Snappy (talk) 14:31, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
• Support; move to Provisional Government of Ireland (1922) as a first choice or alternate (per discussions below) "Provisional governments of Ireland (1922)".

Comments: All indications are that "Provisional Government of the Irish Free State" would be more correct as the provisional forerunner government. If a consensus deems this article should not be generally titled and used to consolidate the many names and "hats" (also discussed below) used during 1922, that I think would lessen confusion and enhance Wikipedia, then I fully support "Provisional Government of the Irish Free State" over the current title. It is illogical that representatives from Northern Ireland would have agreed to or signed anything with "Southern" in the title since they were a party and had to withdraw. They had the option of remaining and I can not be convinced Northern Ireland becoming part of a "Southern Ireland" provisional government, or a government stemming from that title, would even be a consideration with the knowledge that strong factions did not want a split country. Otr500 (talk) 10:28, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Question. Just for curiosity, Otr, if all indications are that "Provisional Government of the Irish Free State" would be more correct as the provisional forerunner government, why do you not support a move to Provisional Government of the Irish Free State? --Scolaire (talk) 10:38, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

• Move: there is really only one possible title which is the one the state used itself: Irish Provisional Government or Irish Provisional Government 1922. See detailed reasoning in discussion below. ww2censor (talk) 23:16, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
  • 2nd preference is Move to Provisional Government of Ireland (1922) per other arguments. ISF did not exist yet. ww2censor (talk) 15:23, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

• Move to Provisional Government of the Irish Free State - per Scolaire ----Snowded ^TALK 12:13, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
• Move to Provisional Government of the Irish Free State - Per Scolaire. In fact, the only time I came across the term "Southern Ireland" in the wild was while flying with British Airways from Schiphol to Dublin. They insisted on calling Ireland Southern Ireland, giving a poor Dutchman a very uneasy feeling of flying to the wrong country... The Banner talk 17:54, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
• Support move to Provisional Government of Ireland (1922) in which the Irish Free State had not yet been established and Northern Ireland had not yet opted out. Pre-empting either in the title would be incorrect. Osioni (talk) 23:34, 20 April 2015 (UTC)User:Osioni

Discussion

Sources for "Provisional Government of the Irish Free State":

• Murray Fraser, John Bull's Other Homes: State Housing and British Policy in Ireland, 1883-1922, p. 262
• Clive Emsley and Barbara Weinberger, Policing Western Europe: Politics, Professionalism, and Public Order, 1850-1940, p. 139
• Francis M. Carroll, Money for Ireland: Finance, Diplomacy, Politics, and the First Dáil Éireann Loans, 1919-1936, p. 56
• Jonathan Tonge, Northern Ireland: Conflict and Change, p. 16
• Simon Hall, The Hutchinson Illustrated Encyclopedia of British History, p. 82
• Garth Stevenson, Parallel Paths: The Development of Nationalism in Ireland and Quebec, p. 216
• Eiléan Ní Chuilleanáin (ed.), 'As I was Among the Captives': Joseph Campbell's Prison Diary, 1922-1923, p. 4
• Ann Matthews, Renegades: Irish Republican Women 1900-1922, p. 308
• Julie McDonald and Declan McCavana, "The Walls of Belfast Speak Louder Than Words, in Culture Et Mémoire: Représentations Contemporaines de la Mémoire Dans Les Espaces Mémoriels, Les Arts Du Visuel, la Littérature Et Le Théâtre, p. 267
• G. Boyce, "From War to Neutrality: Anglo-Irish Relations, 1921-1950", British Journal of International Studies, Vol. 5, No. 1 (Apr., 1979), p. 16
• Michael Kennedy, "'It Is a Disadvantage to be Represented by a Woman': The Experiences of Women in the Irish Diplomatic Service", Irish Studies in International Affairs, Vol. 13 (2002), p. 219
• Joseph W. Bishop, Jr., "Law in the Control of Terrorism and Insurrection: The British Laboratory Experience", Law and Contemporary Problems, Vol. 42, No. 2, Changing Rules for Changing Forms of Warfare (Spring, 1978), p. 184

The last is interesting because it is a legal journal and it explicitly says, "The British Parliament ratified the Treaty by the Irish Free State (Agreement) Act, 1922, 12 Geo. 5, c. 4, and the Government by Order in Council transferred to the Provisional Government of the Irish Free State all civil powers." Scolaire (talk) 11:48, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

@Amakuru: I would disagree that the current title is either natural or precise. A provisional government is a government established for a state that is coming into being, not for a state that is defunct (or more precisely in this case, stillborn). Creating a provisional government for Southern Ireland while at the same time declaring that Southern Ireland – which never existed in practice – was being formally abolished would be plain silly. Scolaire (talk) 11:59, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi Scolaire - but surely it was not formally abolished until 6 December 1922, as mentioned in the article on Southern Ireland. And the Provisional Government was abolished on the same day, to be replaced by the actual government of the newly formed Irish Free State. Your proposed title appears to me to fail on accuracy grounds, as the Irish Free State did not exist at the time in question. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 12:09, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

But that's precisely why it was a provisional government. If it was intended as the government of "Southern Ireland" it would simply have been called the "Government of Southern Ireland". It was a provisional government because the state had not been formally created yet. Note that both the Dáil government and the British government both also claimed jurisdiction during this time. Scolaire (talk) 12:14, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

It depends whether "Southern Ireland" is taken to refer to (A) a geographical area, "the 26 counties", or (B) a body corporate, established under the 1920 Act. Sense (B) might be interpretable in a certain British POV regarding succession of states, but it's not very natural. I think even though Southern Ireland and the Provisional Government weere abolished the same day, that does not prove that one was linked to the other. My view is that the Provisional Government was not inserted into the machinery of the 1920 Act; rather, it ran parallel to the ghostly 1920 machine. Sense (A) is natural and precise, but no more so than "Irish Free State", which is more common. Each has the problem of appearing to allude to a body corporate that did not exist in the period in question. jnestorius^(talk) 12:19, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Provisional Government of Ireland in 1922 is bad as it suggests one year in the history of an entity which existed across multiple years. I don't interpret Provisional Government (Ireland) as connoting "all-island", whereas Provisional Government of Ireland would do. I guess parentheses are a crude grammar open to varying interpretations. jnestorius^(talk) 12:19, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

In principle, the Free State did include the whole island. Northern Ireland had to formally leave after it was established. There is therefore no harm even if it is read in an all-Ireland context. Scolaire (talk) 12:29, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

On a side note, you (Jnestorius) asked earlier about names used in 1922. Well, apparently the anti-Treaty IRA used "Provisional Government of Southern Ireland" in several proclamations in 1922 – see here. So if anybody wanted an anti-Treaty IRA bias, "Provisional Government of Southern Ireland" would be the one to go for ;-) Scolaire (talk) 12:39, 8 April 2015

• Comments and reasoning: At this point I am leaning towards Provisional Government of Ireland (1922).

1. The title would be precise enough to avoid ambiguity, while allowing issues to be covered. These issues, addressed in the article, would avoid relegating the title to a disambiguation page or stuck with an unnecessary, not to mention improper (also crude when unavoidable), parenthetical disambiguation involving more than a date.
2. The Provisional Government of Southern Ireland, that was named by one faction (considered illegal by the other), the Provisional Government of the Republic of Ireland, and the Provisional Government of the Irish Free State can all be covered without title bias. The Irish Republic (1919 until Dec. 1922) still proclaimed authority during this time so it would seem any other names would be considered illegal from their point of view.

A second paragraph in the lead really should reflect the April date, as per the treaty, and that "power" was not "effectively" (legally from the British side or loyalists) handed over (recognized) until then. The current content in the lead gives rise to controversy.

The article Chairman of the Provisional Government of the Irish Free State could be affected by a name change. It appears to be a life-stub created in 2004 and as of today still shows no source or references. It was tagged in 2009 with an apparent career tag and a merging would be appropriate for those reasons. The date shown of January 1922, there as well as here, is not accurate since the government was not "legal" until April right? Is there a reason this "date" is avoided in both articles. Otr500 (talk) 08:58, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

The Irish Republic and the Provisional Government were the same people wearing different hats. Calling themselves simply "Provisional Government" neatly evaded the issue of what they were a provisional government of. They could portray themselves as either a republic or a free state as the need arose. The ROI moniker was devised in the 1940s. It is not relevant to this period. The initializer (talk) 12:18, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

They were nearly all the same people but not all. Arthur Griffith was President of the Dáil government but not even a member of the PG. Michael Collins was chairman of the PG. When they both died in August 1922 the two governments were in fact united under W.T. Cosgrave.

The "kissing of hands" stuff in the article is very confusing, and should probably be deleted, since it looks like somebody's interpretation of a primary source. "Power" was "effectively" handed over to the PG in January 1922. Scolaire (talk) 16:46, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

I oppose any move . The existing title is correct. Art. 15 of the Anglo Irish Treaty, and I quote, "the provisional Government of Southern Ireland hereinafter constituted...". The force of law was later given to the Anglo Irish Treaty by the Irish Free State (Agreement) Act 1922 of the United Kingdom. It was a government constituted in accordance with British law and its legal position had nothing whatsoever to do with the rebel Irish republic government. The Treaty as made law by a UK statute was very specific that this was the provisional government for "Southern Ireland", not the Irish Free State. How could it be otherwise as there was no "Ireland" (as it had been split into two separate jurisdictions) and there was no "Irish Free State" (as it hadn't been constituted). I agree that the terms 'Provisional Government of Ireland' and 'Provisional Government of the Irish Free State' were also used in practice and this is already noted in the article. While the official, legal position was absolutely clear, it is hardly surprising that usage varied and that the provisional government itself preferred not to use the 'Southern Ireland' term as it emphasised partition. User:Amakuru - You mentioned your agreement about the name being something other than Provisional Government of Southern Ireland. Are you sure you really think that considering the above? User:Otr500 - I don't really understand your thoughts. The current title is extremely precise and legally correct so why the need for any change? You mention about a name being "(considered illegal by the other)". We all need to understand that this was the Governemnt constituted by British law. It is absolutely not anything to do with a rebel Irish government. It was a provisional government of Southern Ireland legally constituted in accordance with the Irish Free State (Agreement) Act 1922 of the United Kingdom. There was no question mark about its name because the law was clear. It was the provisional government constituted for Southern Ireland under the terms of the Treaty. User:The initializer - I agree that there was overlap in membership between the rebel Irish Republic government and the provisional government of Southern Ireland. But I don't think that has any baring whatsoever on the correct name for the provisional government constituted in accorance with UK law. User:Johnbod - I draw all this to your atttention too, there really is no question mark about what jurisdition it was the provisional government of - it was Southern Ireland; Ireland wasn't a jurisdiction at that time (it was already split up) and the IFS didn't exist. Frenchmalawi (talk) 13:53, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

We all know what it was; the question is the best title for the article. Johnbod (talk) 14:00, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

If we all know that, then isn't it obviuos that we already have the best name for the article. No need for any change as what we have is correct, precise and the best. Stick with what we've had for years I say. Frenchmalawi (talk) 14:05, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

The text of the Treaty is a WP:PRIMARYSOURCE and different editors here have different interpretations of it, which is an instance of why using primary sources is discouraged. Frenchmalawi and Johnbod believe Article 15 ["the provisional Government of Southern Ireland hereinafter constituted"] bestows a name on the government; I and Scolaire believe it merely gives a description of it. Article 15 is actually referring ("hereinafter constituted") to Article 17, which has "steps shall be taken forthwith for summoning a meeting of members of Parliament elected for constituencies in Southern Ireland since the passing of the Government of Ireland Act, 1920, and for constituting a provisional Government". If the Treaty was going to bestow a name on the Government, it would be done in Article 17, not Article 15 (in fact it is done in neither). For comparison, another primary source, The Irish Free State (Agreement) Act, 1922 has "the Provisional Government established under that Article [Article 17]", which IMO is also just a description. jnestorius^(talk) 10:05, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

• @Frenchmalawi: I am sorry to learn of your issues and I wish you well in a solution. You are dead set on convincing everyone that the title is correct as is. That you portray to not understand that there is confusion is bewildering. I will try this in English but you might have to read slowly as I use degraded American English so bear with me.

This title, that you pronounce to be the lawful title, evidenced by the article, shows the dates of this provisional government from 16 January 1922 to 5 December 1922. This government (according to the article) was super-ceded by the Irish Free State (Dec 6th). By using this article name it means that the government of Southern Ireland (1921–22) established by the Government of Ireland Act 1920, establishing the 4th Home Rule, that never actually took effect in Southern Ireland according to the article, must have been reformed. Southern Ireland was certainly created, as well as the Parliament of Southern Ireland. Factions certainly did not agree with this and in fact "Southern Ireland" lay claim to "Northern Ireland" for years.

The Irish Free State (Agreement) Act 1922 was signed 31 March 1922, content which states "...transfer powers to the Provisional Government of the Irish Free State", that links to this article. It further states "the Parliament of Southern Ireland would be dissolved within four months from the passing of the Act; and...", which would be around July 1922. The 2nd Provisional Government, was ran from 30 August 1922 – 6 December 1922. This replaced the 1st Provisional Government that ran from 16 January – 30 August 1922.

Fragmentation of articles does not enhance Wikipedia. A bunch of articles that do not properly tie together to show continuity of events is confusing and using several names within articles and selectively piping them somewhere else where that link can not be established or has to be "dug out" is confusing. In the "List of ministers" section is the First cabinet, that is piped to the 1st Provisional Government section of Government of the 2nd Dáil. The same with the Second cabinet being linked to the 2nd Provisional Government section of Government of the 3rd Dáil. Why not just pipe them directly if dealing with something like this?

"IF" there are times when "dual hats" are exhibited then show this and link the articles. The timeline (beginning) listed for this article corresponds with that of the 1st Provisional Government. We have the Provisional Government of the Irish Free State, this, the Provisional Government of Southern Ireland, and the 1st Provisional Government. The fist two have been linked as being the same. The Irish Free State uses the wording in a pipe Provisional Government of Southern Ireland|Provisional Government of the Irish Free State. The 1st Provisional Government and this article share the same beginning date. I realize that to an "expert" this may not be confusing but to a general reader I might see a possibility.

More confusion: The Section 4th Ministry (10 January – 9 September 1922) has showing for a "main article" Provisional Government of the Irish Free State (parallel government) but links to this article. The section states, Under the terms of the Treaty another cabinet, the Provisional Government (Redirected here), was also established just six days later, under the chairmanship of Michael Collins. The 4th Ministry therefore held office in parallel with the 1st Provisional Government..

It was commented above, "In principle, the Free State did include the whole island. Northern Ireland had to formally leave after it was established.", so to me it was not just "in principle", but "a fact" with a "formal" solution.

Using the current title is misleading. If a consensus should form to continue using this title then the same consensus should not have a problem agreeing to the amending of Northern Ireland to reflect that for a short time it was a part of Southern Ireland which is how it now appears. I still can not see why "Provisional Government of Ireland (1922)" would be controversial. I am sure some of the stamps used that we over-stamped with Rialtas Sealadach na hÉireann made it around the world. This article accepts what the Irish translation is, the Irish surely agreed, and I find it hard to believe representatives of Northern Ireland would have even considered signing an agreement placing them in "Southern Ireland" even over night.

Let us not forget the article Chairman of the Provisional Government of the Irish Free State. This articles has been around since 2004, and I assume with no source because books like this must not be reliable, but uses the "provisional government of the Irish Free State.

Consider taking off the hat of historian, maybe loyalist, and putting on the general readers hat, read these articles, and see if a "hint" of confusion can be discerned. If so then slap on the old editors hat and see if there are improvements that can be made. I might suggest, to stem bias that was actually mention as far back as 2008, that not wearing a British loyalist hat while editing be a thought. Why would I suggest that? To state that anything "legal", thus carrying "force" is only considerable if emanating from England, as if this is the "only "side" of a story that matters (see above), could certainly be considered bias as there is surely two sides to every story. After all, and through it all, the Republic of Ireland does exist. Somehow I get the feeling that was not the ultimate plan of "Great Britain". With that kind of thinking the founding of the United States could not have been July 4, 1776, but September 3, 1783.

I am not sure that "we all know" what the common name really is. I do know that there are reasons to name an article "other" than what might appear to be a "legal" name and we all likely do know that. Controversial names and bias names would be among them. While one or two editors do "seem to know" it does not appear to be crystal clear as is proposed. Both the "Provisional Government of the Irish Free State" or the "Provisional Government of Ireland (1922)", with the parenthetical date used to avoid any confusion, still seem to be more accurate than the current title. Otr500 (talk) 15:59, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

In fairness, Otr, I have to set you straight on a couple of things. Chairman of the Provisional Government of the Irish Free State was moved from Chairman of the Provisional Government of Southern Ireland two weeks ago, at the same time as this article was moved to Provisional Government of the Irish Free State. This article was moved back after Frenchmalawi, who had come late to the party, complained that it had been moved out of process (i.e. following a discussion on the talk page instead of a formal RM), hence this RM. The link to this article from Irish Free State (Agreement) Act 1922 also dates from the time of the move. They haven't been changed back yet because we don't know where this article is going to end up. Otherwise, I quite agree with you on the messiness of the various articles.

BTW you haven't !voted in the RM itself yet. Are you still keeping your options open? Scolaire (talk) 17:06, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks-- I did not look at the move history just, as you can see, going around trying to make sense of things. You stated vote ("vote") but it is really a discussion by comments and a decision by consensus--LOL. As far as the move, there is really no doubt that a "move" can be made boldly, and in fact is encouraged as part of the process, --but-- I didn't look to see if there was prior discussion to determine possibilities of it being contested beforehand. I am impressed, so far, with the tone of the discussion.

I haven't "voted" because I was busy trying to trace things for a definitive title name and waiting to see if there was some "revelation" revealed in comments. ** STILL **, from what I have found, any of the above names, including the ones I traced, are better than the current title. My opinion is that "IF" this article is named "Provisional Government of Ireland (1922)", and specifically if the word government--(s) was plural, then this would be a really great place to consolidate some information for clarification. Otr500 (talk) 23:22, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

To clear your mind some more, I did not say "vote", I said "!vote" (read as "not-vote"). Scolaire (talk) 07:39, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes you certainly did and it looks better in color as it can't be easily overlooked --LOL. Otr500 (talk) 09:32, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

A side issue to the current rename debate is whether the Provisional Government had any theoretical role in the territory of Northern Ireland. Various Wikipedia articles are fastidious in pointing out that Northern Ireland was technically part of the Irish Free State from 6 December until it opted out on 7 December (just as they like to point out that Edward VIII was king of the Irish Free State for a day after his abdication took effect elsewhere); but that does not of itself imply that From 16 January until 5 December the Provisional Government had any claim to Northern Ireland. Of course the parallel Dáil Ministry maintained its all-island claim, and no doubt the PG would at the least downplay the fact that its writ did not run across the border. But the question is whether the position pre-6 Dec was the same as 6-7 Dec (ie technically part of the area but with jurisdiction temporarily/provisionally excluded). Perhaps Scolaire and Otr would answer "Yes" to that question; but I would answer "No", based on the use of "Southern Ireland" in Articles 15 and 17 of the Treaty. While I do not believe "Southern Ireland" is part of the name of the Government, it does delimit its jurisdiction. jnestorius^(talk) 10:38, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

I wouldn't answer either "yes" or "no" to your question. I would say that in effect, the situation with regard to NI and the IFS was pretty well identical to the position in the old Articles 2 and 3 of the Constitution of Ireland. To paraphrase, "The Irish Free State consists of the whole island of Ireland, its islands and the territorial seas", but "Pending the opting-out of Northern Ireland, the jurisdiction of the Provisional Government shall have the like area and extent of application as Southern Ireland." But the legal position was not spelled out by anybody anywhere, so you cannot say definitively what the situation was. Scolaire (talk) 10:48, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Overprinted British stamp

Reasoning for move to Irish Provisional Government. None of the references above are contemporaneous, so I have to give them very little credence while contemporary documentation is the best source.

The most obvious manifestation of the state's name became most well known on the new postage stamps that were created by overpinting the British postage stamps that were then in use. On 17th February 1922 the first stamps were available from sale at post offices throughout the country and had the Irish text Rialtas Sealadaċ na hÉireann 1922 whose English transation is provided by official correspondence as Irish Provisional Government shown on the image displayed. As early as April 1922 The Mint Stamp Company, then of Grafton Street and later in Fownes Steet, published a detailed handbook on the new overprints which contained a copy of a letter, dated 8 Feabhra, from the private secretary of J.J Walsh who became the Postmaster General of Ireland, B. Bird, to The Philatelic Magazine concerning the expected release of stamps in the new state. Note that the letterhead is titled: Rialtas Sealadach na hEireann, (Irish Provisional Government), Ard Oifig an Phuist, Halla an Cathrach, Baile Atha Cliath and states that ... the overprint will consist of the title in the Gaelic of the Irish Provisional Government—'Rialtas Sealadach na hEireann.'

Additionally, in Ireland's Transition is a transcription of a 4 February 1922 letter in the British National Archives from Evelyn Murray, Secretary to the General Post Office, and James Masterton-Smith, Permanent Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies, that refers to a telegram came from the Dublin (most likely from J.J Walsh) to the Postmaster General of the United Kingdom complaining about who was running the Post Office in Ireland until the final transfer was made. The telegram starts: Irish Provisional Government much annoyed by failure to respond to request for stamps for overprinting ...'

So in two contemporaneous official documents we see the new state calling itself the Irish Provisional Government, so we too should use it, with or without the 1922 added. ww2censor (talk)

But "contemporaneous official documents" are not what Wikipedia bases its naming policy on. The Treaty is a "contemporaneous official document" and Frenchmalawi is basing his claim for naming it Provisional Government of Southern Ireland on that. Here is a "contemporaneous official" letter from the Provisional Government of Ireland Committee to the secretary of the Provisional Government of Ireland, and here is Mr. Churchill, chairman of the Provisional Government of Ireland Committee, speaking in the Commons, referring to it as the Provisional Government of the Irish Free State. If you prefer Irish sources, here is a 1931 "official document" from the Department of External Affairs that uses Provisional Government of the Irish Free State. That's why, as jnestorius has already said, using primary sources is discouraged. The appropriate policy is WP:COMMONNAME. Our only job is to find a consensus as to which is the name that is most commonly used. Scolaire (talk) 10:29, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

User:jnestorius said "While I do not believe "Southern Ireland" is part of the name of the Government, it does delimit its jurisdiction." I don't disagree with a word you've said there. We are in full agreement that it was a provisional governement for Southern Ireland. I also agree with you that the law didn't prescribe a particular name. I would add most laws establishing constitutions don't prescribe a full name for the government either. Nothing unusual in that. We both agree that the law very clearly delimited its jurisdiction as "Southern Ireland". Having agreed on those core point, we are now discussing what to call it. I say, call it what it was: "Provisional Governemnt of Southern Ireland". I think this is the most accurate, precise and correct way to title the article. I think it avoids any confusion. I think some other names mentioned like "Irish Provisional Government" are very unclear and confusing. What do you think the article should be called?

User:Otr500 said "Consider taking off the hat of historian, maybe loyalist, and putting on the general readers hat, read these articles, and see if a "hint" of confusion can be discerned." I see no confusion whatsoever. It was a provisional government and its jurisdiction was, as jnestorius and I agree, over Southern Ireland. Could the current title be any less confusing? Frenchmalawi (talk) 14:21, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

So you're retreating from your position that the Treaty gave it the legal name of Provisional Government of Southern Ireland, then? Scolaire (talk) 17:48, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

@Scolaire: if that's "changing my position", I suppose I could say that today there is no "Government of Ireland" today either. After all, that terminology isn't prescribed by the Constitution of Ireland....But we all know there is a Government of Ireland, a title properly used, just as there was a Provisional Government of Southern Ireland. Frenchmalawi (talk) 12:59, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

That's a yes, then. Scolaire (talk) 16:56, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

@Frenchmalawi: "I think it avoids any confusion." There are two differnt kinds of confusion: vagueness/unclarity is one; misleading/ambiguous is the other. I think a name which is unclear is far preferable to a name which is misleading. If it's not clear from the title what the topic is, the obvious simple sol;ution is to start reading the article rather than just the title. OTOH if the title is actually misleading, it takes a far more attentive reading to undo the incorrect initial assumption. "Irish Free State" and "Southern Ireland" are misleading because anachronistic in terms of the polity, although accurate in terms of the boundary. (I think "Irish Free State" is less bad, since provisional looks to the future, not the past.) "Ireland" might be taken to mean (1) "all Ireland" or (2) "relating to Ireland". Whereas (1) is misleading, (2) is merely vague. I think "Provisional Government of Ireland" is more liable to (mis)reading (1) than would be "Provisional Government (Ireland)" or "Irish Provisional Government". IMO either of the latter two titles suggest (2) rather than (1). They are vague, but given the inherent ambiguity of the topic, vagueness is a feature,. not a bug. jnestorius^(talk) 18:37, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

@Jnestorius: said "I think a name which is unclear is far preferable to a name which is misleading." No argument in principle there. But this title couldn't be called misleading. It is calling the provisional government exactly what it was! It is clear from the title what the topic is - it's about the provisional government of Southern Ireland. Many readers have never heard of the Commonwealth of England. You could take the line that that title isn't clear on that basis that a reader won't know what its about until they read on. Well, if some one had never heard of Southern Ireland, they would have to read on. That doesn't make the title misleading. The title doesn't mislead as to the exact legal position, the exact territorial position, the correct "polity". In contrast, any title for the article that omits Southern Ireland would likely be misleading. After all, it wasn't the provisional government of the Irish Free State as that polity didn't exist so that title would be completely misleading. It wasn't the provisional government of Ireland because that polity didn't exist either. To call it the Provisional Irish Government is misleading in that if you want to take that approach, it must be called the Southern Ireland Provisional Government or you will again be unclear and misleading. You also suggested it was an anachronism. I googled what that means "a thing belonging or appropriate to a period other than that in which it exists, especially a thing that is conspicuously old-fashioned." Southern Ireland was a term that belonged to the period in question. It was the name of the jurisdiction over which the provisional government in question had jurisdiction and this was specified by law too. Obviously, if I called Taoiseach Enda Keeny the Taoiseach of Southern Ireland, I could be accused of using an anachronistic term. But here, we are dealing with an article on a historic matter: the provisional government of Southern Ireland. Are you arguing for the title to be changed? If so, to what? What is wrong with the present title? Frenchmalawi (talk) 12:59, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

"Southern Ireland" may refer to the institutions established by the 1920 act or to the geographical area in which those institutions applied. The 1922 Provisional Government had nothing to do with the institutions. It covered the same geographical area, but that does not oblige anyone to use the same name to refer to that area. (e.g. the Irish Free State (Agreement) Act 1922 says "a constituency in Ireland other than a constituency in Northern Ireland".) My concern is not for a hypothetical reader who has not heard of Southern Ireland, but just the opposite: a hypothetical reader who has heard of it. Such a reader may infer that the 1922 government related to the 1920 institutions, rather than merely sharing a similar geographic area. jnestorius^(talk) 14:04, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

There is no one "right" name, and so if you call it "Provisional Government of Southern Ireland", you will have to add "also known variously as the Provisional Government of Ireland; the Provisional Government of the Irish Free State; the Irish Provisional Government". Anyone googling the different names will find them that way. This is angels on a pinhead stuff.78.16.50.189 (talk) 09:20, 10 May 2015 (UTC) There is no one "right" name, and so if you call it "Provisional Government of Southern Ireland", you will have to add "also known variously as the Provisional Government of Ireland; the Provisional Government of the Irish Free State; the Irish Provisional Government". Anyone googling the different names will find them that way. This is angels on a pinhead stuff.78.16.50.189 (talk) 09:20, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

IF there was not a reason to be ambiguous back then, that was to avoid conflict, we would not be having this protracted discussion. There may not be an exact right name but there is certainly a wrong one. The current title is supported by only one person in the RM. The one editor thus far ardently defending the current title in this discussion has not even "!voted" in the RM. Counting these two there would still be only two supporting the current title naming. A problem is that there are two names that have support and either are more viable than the present name.

Provisional Government of the Irish Free State has an edge by direct choice and Provisional Government of Ireland (1922) a clear lead when counting alternates or 2nd preferences. I feel that to avoid bias either way, pro-British or Pro-Irish, Provisional Government of Ireland (1922) would be a better choice. The Handover of Dublin Castle section uses "Provisional Government" around ten times. "Provisional Government in Ireland" and "Provisional Government of Ireland" (the reply from George R.) was used once each, and the word "Southern" was used zero times. The British government separated the Island and in 1920 and used the naming with "Southern" in it but this was done away with in 1922 and never supported by Ireland. Look at the section Name of Provisional Government that states "Now we have what is called a Provisional Government in Ireland".

So do we call the article a pro-British name, a pro-Irish name, or a neutral name? Does community consensus still support WP:NPOV in articles and titles? It states, "This page in a nutshell: Articles must not take sides, but should explain the sides, fairly and without bias. This applies to both what you say and how you say it.". We have two sides of the "story" so how should we present it? Otr500 (talk) 18:24, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Original research

This article has always been original research. From its creation in 2004 to the beginning of 2008 it had no references at all. Right up to this week it has been almost entirely sourced from primary sources: the text of acts and agreements and contemporary newspaper accounts. The handful of secondary sources that there were were referencing peripheral matters, and in almost every case they were misquoted. Now, tidying up the article is a worthy aim, but replacing original research with other original research is not an option. In particular, keeping the same primary sources and putting a different gloss on them does not tend to improve the article. A number of statements have been added that appear to be one editor's opinion. Such statements need to be supported by reliable published secondary sources that explicitly make the assertion contained in the statements. It is not enough to say that they are self-evident if you read the text of the act or whatever. For instance:

• "The Provisional Government was a creature of United Kingdom law".
• "Accordingly, United Kingdom law expressly described the provisional government as 'the provisional Government of Southern Ireland'."
• "Moreover, under United Kingdom law there was no question of the Provisional Government being a provisional government of 'Ireland'."
• "Notwithstanding that its jurisdiction was over Southern Ireland only, the Provisional Government styled itself the Provisional Government of Ireland".
• "The Provisional Government is sometimes erroneously referred to as having been the Provisional Government of the Irish Free State" (a particularly egregious one: many books, articles, web sites etc. refer to it as such, but I have never seen one that said it is erroneous).
• "Although there was a gap in formal accountability to an elected parliament..."
• "The Provisional Government's actions were subject to the Courts."

There is no paucity of books on the period that will have good detail on the formation of the Provisional Government, its name and so on. Some of these should be viewable on Google Books. If some or all of those statements can be sourced, well and good. If not, I propose to remove them, and leave the bare facts, pending somebody doing a proper rewrite. Scolaire (talk) 17:23, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

I have rewritten the "Name" section, citing plenty of reliable secondary sources, and quoting (but not interpreting) the relevant primary sources. Scolaire (talk) 08:15, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

For the benefit of others, I am the 'editor' (if I can call myself that) whose quoted above. Anyway, I do agree that there is a bit of a problem in that I don't think there is in fact any published legal analysis on what the name of the "provisional Government of Southern Ireland" (to quote the UK statute that created it) was. It is unfortunately a very marginal topic. If anyone can point to a legal analysis that's been published, I'd be delighted. What's described by Scolaire as the "bare facts" that are now left in are, unfortunately, not factual. All of the points Scolaire lists above he does not seem to dispute. If he does, do let us know what's disputed. They are basic factual statements. No one has published a legal analysis of the name of the government so we either repeat inaccuracies or try to address the gap in a 'common sense' way. At the moment, mumbo jumbo is presented as fact. I've opened a section to discuss the new wording (below). Scolaire and I interacted last year and I (up above in the discussion page - you can see our interactions) hold no hope of getting anywhere with him. But, who knows, others might chime in sometime. In the meantime, well done Scolaire - suspect your 'facts' will remain up.Frenchmalawi (talk) 00:00, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

For the record, (1) yes, I do dispute all of the points I listed – that's why I listed them and why I removed them from the article; (2) I did not, in the end, leave "bare facts" – I rewrote the section, citing reliable, published secondary sources. This, apparently, is what you call "mumbo-jumbo". I'll respond to the rest in the section below. Scolaire (talk) 09:38, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

There is still some original research but that is inevitable where so many secondary sources have cognitive and political bias. The Taoiseach's website is OK as a source, but Hansard is not? Surely both are needed. Most people have shied away from the history of Ireland in 1922 because it was so messy; the detail can reveal why that was so.PatrickGuinness (talk) 13:49, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

The article on Barthes' S/Z could be original research, without a single footnote, but it looks OK to me.PatrickGuinness (talk) 21:50, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Name Section: Accuracy problems

Before going on to discuss the above, I reproduce here the wording I had suggested for the section:

FrenchMalawi suggestion - Name of Provisional Government

Postage stamps of the government consisted of overprinted British stamps. The text in traditional Irish orthography reads Rialtas Sealadach na hÉireann 1922 and translates as Provisional Government of Ireland 1922

The Provisional Government was a creature of United Kingdom law, namely the Irish Free State (Agreement) Act, 1922. The Anglo Irish Treaty was given the force of law by that United Kingdom statute which also set out the Treaty in its schedule. Article 15 of the Treaty as set out in that United Kingdom statute refers to "the provisional Government of Southern Ireland hereinafter constituted", referring to Article 17 of the Treaty quoted above, which refers to "the administration of Southern Ireland". Accordingly, United Kingdom law expressly described the provisional government as "the provisional Government of Southern Ireland". Moreover, under United Kingdom law there was no question of the Provisional Government being a provisional government of "Ireland". This was because Ireland had been partitioned into two jurisdictions, Southern Ireland and Northern Ireland, and Ireland therefore no longer existed as a distinct jurisdiction.

Notwithstanding that its jurisdiction was over Southern Ireland only, the Provisional Government styled itself the Provisional Government of Ireland, or Rialtas Sealadach na hÉireann in Irish. It overprinted its postage stamps accordingly. Sir Thomas Molony, the Lord Chief Justice of Ireland, reluctantly agreed to London's request to overprint High Court judgments likewise. Several Acts of the post-1922 Oireachtas of the Irish Free State and the post-1937 Oireachtas also refer to the "Provisional Government of Ireland".

The Provisional Government is sometimes erroneously referred to as having been the Provisional Government of the Irish Free State. However, the Irish Free State was not created in law until 6 December 1922 when its Constitution came into force. When the Irish Free State was created, the Provisional Government ceased to exist being replaced by the Executive Council of the Irish Free State. Accordingly, the Provisional Government was never a government of the Irish Free State. The Irish Free State Constitution refers to the Executive Council's predecessor as "the Provisional Government" without referring to the name of the jurisdiction it was the provisional government of.

References

French Malawi commentary on Scolaire's revision

In article 17 of the Treaty, under which it was set up, [FM: No, it wasn't set up under the Treaty. The Treaty had no force of law. It was set up under a UK statute as was explained in the wording I had proposed] it was referred to merely as "a provisional Government" [No, it was described specifically as "the provisional Government of Southern Ireland"] hereinafter constituted". The Irish Free State (Agreement) Act 1922, which implemented the Treaty in British [FM: The reference to British here is superfluous and confused. There was no other law] law, referred to it only as "the Provisional Government established under that Article [Article 17] [FM: No that's not correct. The statute included the Treaty in its Schedule. The Treaty which forms part of the UK statute was unambiguous expressly describing it as the "provisional Government of Southern Ireland".] Similarly, the Mansion House meeting at which the government was constituted resolved that "a Provisional Government be and is hereby constituted". [FM: That has absolutely no relevance on what it was legally; which is only what it was under the UK statute - we are referring to a devolved UK government; nothing else] The Irish Times story on the meeting referred to it as "the Irish Free State Provisional Government" [FM: Great, so what? Is anyone seriously suggesting that was correct? What's the point in this mumbo jumbo if we don't spell out the facts as to what it was legally. Afterwards we can then discuss how Irish Times and others described it in all sorts of other ways] while its editorial of the same date referred to it as "the Provisional Government of Ireland" [FM: Does that somehow affect the law?]. A committee set up to deal with Irish affairs, headed by Winston Churchill, was called the "Provisional Government of Ireland Committee". [FM: All of this stuff is fine and dandy and nice to note somewhere but it's really a pity that we don't describe the legal position in a clear an unambiguous way and then go on to discuss how people of the era called it various things. Ultimately, a reader would just walk away confused from all of this which doesn't distinguish facts from perceptions].Frenchmalawi (talk) 23:46, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

You deliberately misquoted my paragraph in order to make your criticism appear more effective, which is telling. My paragraph says, "In article 17 of the Treaty, under which it was set up, it was referred to merely as 'a provisional Government', although Article 15, dealing with discussions between North and South, referred to 'the provisional Government of Southern Ireland hereinafter constituted'." You have here left out the second part of the sentence, which puts article 15 in context, so that you can say that I wrongly left out "of Southern Ireland". This is important, of course, because your whole argument, however many reams you may write, is that those three words, inconveniently in the wrong article of the Treaty, can be spun out into the enshrining of the name "provisional Government of Southern Ireland" in British law. You have nothing else, in the face of ten major works on Irish history that I have cited that say otherwise (you left that bit out of the above "criticism" too).

Re the "Provisional Government of Ireland Committee", are you seriously saying that Lloyd George, who drafted the Treaty and was a signatory to it, created a committee called the "Provisional Government of Ireland Committee" to deal with a body whose name was enshrined in law by that Treaty as the "provisional Government of Southern Ireland", or that Winston Churchill, another signatory, happily chaired that committee without complaining about the "wrong" name?

Re "published legal analysis", one of my citations, an article by Joseph W. Bishop Jr., Sam Harris Professor of Law at Yale Law School, says this: "The British Parliament ratified the Treaty by the Irish Free State (Agreement) Act, 1922, 12 Geo. 5, c. 4, and the Government by Order in Council transferred to the Provisional Government of the Irish Free State all civil powers" (emphasis added). That's pretty definitive, inasmuch as it tells us that United Kingdom law did not expressly describe the provisional government as "the provisional Government of Southern Ireland."

Incidentally, the "criticism" presupposes that my paragraph in the article was intended as a refutation of your fallacy. It's not. It's just an encyclopaedic collection of verifiable and interesting facts around the name of a thing that didn't actually have a name.

Like you, I am saying this for the benefit of other readers who might "walk away confused from all of this". I have no intention of playing ping-pong with you. My position is still the same: anything challenged or likely to be challenged must be supported by reliable, published secondary sources. Scolaire (talk) 10:15, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Yip, I remember your 'position' from last year. You were harking on then about it having been the Provisional Government of the Irish Free State. That the Irish Free State didn't exist at the time doesn't matter. That Ireland (jurisdiction) didn't exist then either doesn't bother you. You've found a source that uses that inaccurate 'Irish Free State' description. For your impressive intellect, that's enough. How an informal committee is described trumps statute too for you. You know you don't know anything about law, but that doesn't bother you. You can type. I did hope others might get involved but, alas, no. Wikipedia goes south when aggressive non-intellects prevail. Admittedly I'm being bold (but I think Wiki says we should be bold sometimes) right now. But what the hell, there's no point having rational, informed discussion with you. We've got a past. We've interacted before. I know the score with you. People who take pride in not having finished high school but being able to type etc. You've won man. You're better than me. Your 'knowledgable' guidance prevails. Well done. You know deep inside that I know far more than you do about the topic but who cares. You can type. People like you push people like me off Wikipedia. Your ignorance will be the most read guidance on the topic. Bravo. I have an image of you as an unemployed, older man with little education but lots of opinions and a lot of time on your hands. Not sure if that's correct or not but in any event, I hope interactions like ours bring you a sense of satisfaction. For me, it's the very opposite. Frenchmalawi (talk) 00:01, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Both of you, the exact name doesn't matter so much; just add them all. You are both clever and gifted, but undue nitpicking gives wikipedia a bad name.PatrickGuinness (talk) 14:01, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for calling me "clever and gifted", but have you actually read the section? I have given all the names, without nitpicking. Scolaire (talk) 15:21, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Accountability aspects

The article reads: "Therefore, between its formation on 14 January 1922 and 19 September 1922 (when the Provisional Parliament first met) the Provisional Government was responsible to no parliament at all."

The PGI was accountable to the UK Parliament until such time as the Treaty provisions were effected, as they were in December 1922. The Second Dáil members had been elected in the 1921 UK election, and they had chosen to sit as the Dáil, they had voted to approve the treaty, and the treaty was going to create the Irish Free State. In the meantime, the PGI was entitled to call elections for any number of parliaments in the 26 counties, so long as they ultimately set up a state in line with the Treaty. The issue of who the PGI was accountable to is only of theoretic interest, as its progress was debated in Westminster and Belfast as well as Dublin.78.18.200.138 (talk) 12:54, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

I've never been fond of that section. The whole thing is original research as far as I can see. History books and articles talk about the fact that there were two governments in Ireland between January and August 1922, and that they were merged under W.T. Cosgrave after the deaths of Arthur Griffith and Michael Collins, but I have never yet encountered one that talked about "accountability", or whether the Provisional Govt. was responsible to any parliament. If it's not in reliable secondary sources, then it is somebody's personal commentary, and doesn't belong in an encyclopaedia. The ref for that sentence you quoted is the Department of the Taoiseach (its new home is here). Some will say there's nothing more reliable than the government's own website, but in fact it doesn't satisfy WP:Reliable sources, because we have no idea who wrote it, or what the editorial process (including fact-checking) was. It is in fact no more reliable than a blog. Moreover, the thing that is being cited in that ref is not a discussion of "accountability", or even a discussion of the Provisional Govt., it is a footnote to the table of ministers in the second ministry of the Second Dáil. Effectively it's saying, "the Dáil government was responsible to the Dáil and, by the way, I can't see who the Provisional Govt. was responsible to." I agree with you that the issue of who the Provisional Govt. was accountable to is only of theoretical interest, and it's not even interesting enough to have been discussed in reliable sources. The whole section should be deleted, and replaced with a few words about the dual government system between January and August 1922. Here is a book that could be cited. There are plenty more. Scolaire (talk) 14:21, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

But it's objectively true that the Provisional Government was not responsible to any parliament until September 1922, nor did it need to be. The agreed plan hit the buffers, and in hindsight Collins turned out to be a weak statesman, promising all things to all men.78.17.34.145 (talk) 21:35, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Mohr 2018 paper

This article is worth citing:

• Mohr, Thomas (31 Mar 2018). "Law and the Foundation of the Irish State on 6 December 1922". The Irish Jurist. 59: 31–58.

Draft version at:

• Mohr, Thomas (6 December 2017). "Law and the Foundation of the Irish State on 6 December 1922". UCD Working Papers in Law, Criminology & Socio-Legal Studies Research Paper (2517). doi:10.2139/ssrn.3083405.

Introduction:

The date of 6 December 1922 ... had so many competitors for the title of Irish “independence day”, for example Easter Monday 1916, 21 January 1919, 6 December 1921, 14 January 1922, 31 March 1922 and 1 April 1922. ... This article examines the legal basis for fixing 6 December 1922 as the date on which an internationally recognised Irish State came into existence. This question raises many difficult issues and it might well be asked why such an examination is necessary at all when many organs of the Irish State already treat 6 December 1922 as the de facto date on which it came into existence. One reason is that a number of early decisions of the Irish courts, including the Supreme Court, assert that the State came into existence on dates other than 6 December 1922. ... Recent publications have also cast doubt on the validity of 6 December 1922 as the date on which the state came into being.

jnestorius^(talk) 12:21, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Sounds interesting. But reading the abstract, it just seems to be asking an academic – and possibly abstract – legal question about the date of the creation of "the Irish state". Does it argue that the Provisional Government did not become the Government of the Free State on 6 December 1922? If not, I can't see how it might affect this article. Scolaire (talk) 17:49, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Why the brackets and 1922? Were there others?

No other Provisional Governments of Ireland that were recognised by the outside world, nor will there be, so why the year in brackets?78.16.102.94 (talk) 20:07, 26 March 2021 (UTC)