I'm not sure the Statute of Rhuddlan should be included in this template. It was basically a law dealing with the internal arrangement of Wales. The Acts of Union 1536-1543 joined England and Wales together, which was really the first step in the creation of the UK. --JW1805 (Talk) 22:17, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2005-11-30T22:17:00.000Z","author":"JW1805","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-JW1805-2005-11-30T22:17:00.000Z-Statute_of_Rhuddlan","replies":["c-Owain-2005-12-01T10:32:00.000Z-JW1805-2005-11-30T22:17:00.000Z","c-14.243.11.230-20230302080900-JW1805-2005-11-30T22:17:00.000Z"]}}-->
There has been further discussion on the inclusion of earlier treaties specific to either of the states which would go on to form the UK here. In line with the comments expressed ive removed the Anglo-Welsh specific treaties to leave only the treaties which directly lead to the formation of the UK. siarach 13:52, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2006-12-25T13:52:00.000Z","author":"An Siarach","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-An_Siarach-2006-12-25T13:52:00.000Z-Statute_of_Rhuddlan","replies":["c-An_Siarach-2006-12-25T14:05:00.000Z-An_Siarach-2006-12-25T13:52:00.000Z"],"displayName":"siarach"}}-->
This didnt essentially change the title of the United Kingdom as it remained The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland until the Anglo-Irish Treaty. I understand the importance of it in terms of dividing Ireland into North and South but is it important enough to be in this template? --Horses In The Sky 12:16, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2006-04-05T12:16:00.000Z","author":"Horses In The Sky","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Horses_In_The_Sky-2006-04-05T12:16:00.000Z-1920_Government_of_Ireland_Act","replies":["c-JW1805-2006-04-05T18:15:00.000Z-Horses_In_The_Sky-2006-04-05T12:16:00.000Z"]}}-->
I think the de-annexation of England and Wales (1955) must be added to the template. How do you think about it? --yes0song 14:26, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2006-12-19T14:26:00.000Z","author":"Yes0song","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Yes0song-2006-12-19T14:26:00.000Z-Deannexation_of_England_and_Wales_(1955)","replies":["c-Yorkshire_Phoenix_(194.203.110.127)-2006-12-20T14:25:00.000Z-Yes0song-2006-12-19T14:26:00.000Z"]}}-->
I think there is definately a place for a template which lists all such treaties within the UK but, for the same reason the pre UK Anglo-Welsh treaties should not be included, the de-annexation of Wales has no place on a template dealing with the formation of the UK ( had de-annexation also resulted in independence from the UK that would be a different matter). siarach 13:54, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2006-12-25T13:54:00.000Z","author":"An Siarach","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-An_Siarach-2006-12-25T13:54:00.000Z-Deannexation_of_England_and_Wales_(1955)","replies":[],"displayName":"siarach"}}-->
Yes0song, I do not know where you get this date "1955" from? The only thing that seems to have happened in 1955 was that, arguably for the first time in history, Wales had an official capital declared (Cardiff). When you talk of "de-annexation" I assume that you are referring to the repeal of the Wales and Berwick Act 1746 (as it applies to Wales, but not Berwick) by the fourth section of the Welsh Language Act 1967. If this truly was "de-annexation" then the UK Parliament managed to legislate for it in a most obscure fashion - probably intentionally. --Mais oui! 04:29, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-02-14T04:29:00.000Z","author":"Mais oui!","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Mais_oui!-2007-02-14T04:29:00.000Z-Deannexation_of_England_and_Wales_(1955)","replies":["c-Yes0song-2007-08-11T14:19:00.000Z-Mais_oui!-2007-02-14T04:29:00.000Z"]}}-->
Wales did not play any part in forming the UK - the earliest signs of which can be traced no earlier than the Union of Crowns between Scotland and England. To say otherwise goes against the grain of both academic and lay thought on the matter. If the annexation of Wales into England is to be included then so should the annexation of the Northern Isles by Scotland, the Lordship of the Isles by Scotland, the creation and abolition of the Cornish Stannary Parliament, Northumbria officially becoming part of England under the Treaty of York etc etc. Seeing as the inclusion of Statute of Rhuddlan would mean the inclusion of the treaties which formed/were relevant only to the nations which THEN went on to form the UK you would also have to go back to Dal Riata and Pictavia which merged to form Scotland as well as the Heptarchy which preceeded the single Kingdom of England and so on, so forth. The two primary and only independent participants in the formation of the UK were England and Scotland - there is absolutely no controversy or ambiguity over this - and if earlier treaties specific to internal politics of either of those nations are to be included in the template then there are myriad others beyond these Anglo-Welsh ones which should also be included and this would simply be ridiculous. The only legitimate inclusion of Wales in the template would be under mention of its de-annexation from England in 1955 as shown in a template at the bottom of the talk page of the template as this was, unlike Rhuddlan, relevant to and occurred within the UK. (pasted from ealrier post on a seperate talk page) siarach 11:06, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-01-16T11:06:00.000Z","author":"An Siarach","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-An_Siarach-2007-01-16T11:06:00.000Z-England_and_Wales","replies":["c-14.243.11.230-20230302081000-An_Siarach-2007-01-16T11:06:00.000Z"],"displayName":"siarach"}}-->
I disagree with this edit. Wales is currently one of the main subnational entities in the UT. In this context, it is import to list the legislation that made that happen. Wales is not in the same category as Dal Riata, Pictavia, or the Heptarchy, which are entities that predated the current Home Nations (and whose annexation didn't involve any Acts of Parliament). My idea when I created this template was to list the legislative acts which formed the UK. --JW1805 (Talk) 01:20, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-01-18T01:20:00.000Z","author":"JW1805","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-JW1805-2007-01-18T01:20:00.000Z-England_and_Wales","replies":["c-An_Siarach-2007-01-18T10:00:00.000Z-JW1805-2007-01-18T01:20:00.000Z","c-JW1805-2007-02-10T16:33:00.000Z-JW1805-2007-01-18T01:20:00.000Z","c-An_Siarach-2007-02-10T17:57:00.000Z-JW1805-2007-01-18T01:20:00.000Z","c-An_Siarach-2007-02-14T04:22:00.000Z-JW1805-2007-01-18T01:20:00.000Z","c-Deb-2007-02-14T17:28:00.000Z-JW1805-2007-01-18T01:20:00.000Z"]}}-->
I totally reject the notion that the merging of England and Wales is irrelavent to the formation of the UK. How can you maintain that? England, Scotland, Wales, and N Ireland were once separate, now they are together. That is what is in the template. Maybe the title "Formation of the UK" is the problem? What would be a better name for these Acts, which clearly have a common thread, and it is entirely appropriate to list them together in some fashion. (Maybe Joining of the Home Nations of the United Kingdom?... seems too wordy).--JW1805 (Talk) 18:31, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-02-18T18:31:00.000Z","author":"JW1805","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-JW1805-2007-02-18T18:31:00.000Z-England_and_Wales","replies":["c-Br2387-2007-02-18T19:57:00.000Z-JW1805-2007-02-18T18:31:00.000Z"]}}-->
I agree to an extent with both the previous posts by JW1805 and Barry. My problem with the listing of acts which predate 1603 and/or 1707 is mainly connected with the way this template is named and represented. As i previously stated the inclusion of the Anglo-Welsh specific acts ( which, again, as previously stated do not bear direct relevance to the formation of the UK) would be fine but not within a template which claims to mark the treaties which formed the UK. Wales being conquered and then formally annexed by England did not have any significant/direct role in forming the UK. The UK was formed by Scotland and England and technically, later on ( and i must stress the technically), by Ireland. Wales is by far the least signficant Home Nation in this regard and is without ANY direct link to the formation of the UK. If the Template was named Joining of the Home Nations of the United Kingdom or something similar then i would have absolutely no quible whatsoever and so perhaps a move to something along these lines is the answer to this dispute? siarach 00:44, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-02-19T00:44:00.000Z","author":"An Siarach","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-An_Siarach-2007-02-19T00:44:00.000Z-England_and_Wales","replies":["c-JW1805-2007-02-19T05:59:00.000Z-An_Siarach-2007-02-19T00:44:00.000Z","c-Mais_oui!-2007-02-19T07:13:00.000Z-An_Siarach-2007-02-19T00:44:00.000Z"],"displayName":"siarach"}}-->
Copied from my talk pageThis template is not a mini list of acts of the English Parliament please stop making it as such thanks. --Barryob Vigeur de dessus 20:44, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-04-17T20:44:00.000Z","author":"Barryob","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Barryob-2007-04-17T20:44:00.000Z-Neustrianos_edits","replies":["c-Barryob-2007-04-17T20:55:00.000Z-Barryob-2007-04-17T20:44:00.000Z","c-14.243.11.230-20230302081100-Barryob-2007-04-17T20:44:00.000Z"]}}-->
I missed that part on the Scottish Parliament page. I have now added it to the template. Maybe it looks like clutter, but I hope not. Neustriano 21:00, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
How about merging the Union of the Crowns with the present Acts of Union 1707 article, so that ALL Acts of Union from 1603-1707 are represented? This would give a better, over-all view of the entire process. Yes, I recognize that the Tudor-Stewart treaties of Perpetual Peace and Greenwich would be separate from the Acts of Parliament--but maybe they can be united in one article of their own as well. Neustriano 21:04, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I was hoping we could have a Jacobean Acts of Scottish and English Parliaments template between 1603-1707 and possibly post-Stuart Unions and/or separations (Northern Ireland separation from Ireland, etc). Neustriano 21:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Barry has alleged that there was no such thing as a "Union of England and Scotland Act 1603", but that's not what the UK government says. It happened upon the accession of King James, to mark the Union of the Crowns. That is to say, it was the official Union of the Crowns as noted in the reign of James. I'm not going about making this stuff up. I collect previously researched info; I don't develop it. Neustriano 21:23, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
There seems to be some disagreement over the use of the flag of Ireland in the 1801 Act of Union. My suggestion is using the St Patrick's Saltire in preference to the Leinster/Harp/Republic of Ireland President's flag because it gives a clear indication of how/why the Union Flag was changed. It's been claimed that evidence for its usage before 1801 is scant and I accept its use must have been limited at best, but it seems that in addition to illustrating the change to the Union Flag it also has no less official usage than this harp flag.
I await your comments. -- beano (talk) 16:50, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-11-16T16:50:00.000Z","author":"Beano ni","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Beano_ni-2007-11-16T16:50:00.000Z-1801_Ireland_Flag","replies":["c-Sony-youth-2007-11-16T17:34:00.000Z-Beano_ni-2007-11-16T16:50:00.000Z","c-Beano_ni-2007-11-25T21:19:00.000Z-Beano_ni-2007-11-16T16:50:00.000Z"],"displayName":"beano"}}-->
I've replaced the flag of the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland with the Flag of Northern Ireland for the Government of Ireland Act. Since no new state was created or merged with the UK, I lean towards the opinion that only the UK flag should be shown (as with the Royal & Parliamentary Titles Act). The reason for changing this to the Northern Ireland flag is because the major consequence of the 1920 act was the creation of Northern Ireland. It's consequence in the south were overtaken by the Anglo–Irish Treaty. --sony-youthpléigh 11:27, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-11-26T11:27:00.000Z","author":"Sony-youth","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Sony-youth-2007-11-26T11:27:00.000Z-Government_of_Ireland_Act","replies":[]}}-->
If the template includes the Government of Ireland Act and the Royal & Parliamentary Titles Act then should it not also include the following?
Comments? Also the title is a little off (and long-winded) at present IMHO. --sony-youthpléigh 11:39, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-11-26T11:39:00.000Z","author":"Sony-youth","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Sony-youth-2007-11-26T11:39:00.000Z-Devolution_and_title","replies":["c-Barryob-2007-11-26T13:45:00.000Z-Sony-youth-2007-11-26T11:39:00.000Z"]}}-->
I added Laudabiliter (an obvious oversight). Choice of the Harp as symbol is because this was recorded as the arms of the Kings of Ireland. --sony-youthpléigh 12:14, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-11-26T12:14:00.000Z","author":"Sony-youth","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Sony-youth-2007-11-26T12:14:00.000Z-Laudabiliter","replies":[]}}-->
I've added the Treaty of Perth, which brought the Hebrides and Caithness into what is at present the UK; should be a further link for the pledging of Orkney and Shetland, but can't immediately see a good link for that. ariwara (talk) 13:59, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2008-01-01T13:59:00.000Z","author":"Ariwara","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Ariwara-2008-01-01T13:59:00.000Z-Treaty_of_Perth","replies":["c-Sony-youth-2008-01-01T19:34:00.000Z-Ariwara-2008-01-01T13:59:00.000Z"]}}-->
I have reverted this removal, though I am happy to accept that there have to be some limits in time and importance on items listed here as Sony-youth says. This template is in essence a listing of the significant legislative acts, and treaties, which led to the UK having sovereignty over the landmass it now occupies. From a historical point of view, a natural beginning is the eleventh century, when the two states which came together in 1707 to establish the United Kingdom (Mark I) were well-established. If however one then asks the question 'how did the two kingdoms of England and Scotland, and the remainder of the current UK, come to be one state' , it is necessary not only to consider the acquisition of Wales by England, and the long relationship between England and Ireland which led to the 1800 Union and the UK Mark II, but also the acquisition of the outlying parts of the archipelago. I fully accept that, from a narrowly English perspective, what happens outwith England/UK may be of little interest; but the genesis of the UK is a union of two historically-independent and equal kingdoms: the assertion/acquisition of sovereignty by a UK forebear in a part of the landmass is important whichever forebear was involved. That is why the Statute of Rhuddlan is (rightly) included.
From an 'importance' point of view, the Treaty of Perth remains historically significant in a way in which such passing moments in Anglo-Irish history as the Laudabiliter Bull are, with all possible respect, not.
Let us also consider that, while this template has now extended beyond the ultimate 'formation' of the UK in 1800 to the C20 statutes and treaties which affect that formation in one way or another, the Irish Free State was most definitely not part of that history after 1922; the Parliamentary history since then, such as the declaration of the Republic and its recognition by the UK in 1948, are not: they are part of the history of an independent state. On that basis, I have also reverted the inclusion of the 1948 Act.
Discussion please, if you continue to disagree; not edit war. ariwara (talk) 22:03, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2008-01-01T22:03:00.000Z","author":"Ariwara","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Ariwara-2008-01-01T22:03:00.000Z-Treaty_of_Perth","replies":["c-Sony-youth-2008-01-02T11:46:00.000Z-Ariwara-2008-01-01T22:03:00.000Z"]}}-->
A brief note: shortage of time. (1) My apologies for the assumption that your edit was from a 'narrowly English' perspective; an assumption too readily made when dealing with excisions of Scots references. (2) My reference to Laudabiliter as of passing importance was because it seems to me to have only historical significance as creating a veneer of legality for the English supremacy in Ireland (much as did the papal bull of 18 March 1291 in the case of Scotland), which ceased to be relied on from 1542; thus long before any United Kingdom. But I can see that theologically it may have continuing importance; I cannot judge that. (3) The Treaty of Perth is certainly part of the formation of the Scottish state, as Rhuddlan was of the English state. But, rephrasing the question which I think this template seeks to answer 'how did the current United Kingdom come to be the United Kingdom' , it is also part of the history of the formation of the UK; absent that treaty, and with no further treaty, some ten per cent of the UK's land area would not now be part of the UK. (4) I take your point on the Republic of Ireland Act and have reinstated it; but I have to say that it seems anomalous that the independent act of a foreign and independent state should be in this template, and I wonder if the link should not rather be to the Ireland Act 1949.
There is, as with other templates of this kind, a tension as to what is included. The formation of the UK might be taken to require links only to the acts of 1707 and 1800; the remainder of its first part (i.e. to 1800) deals with (a) matters relevant to the designation or status of monarchs (rather than the state) and/or (b) the extension of the precursor states of 1707 over the British and Irish landmass. This wider approach seems a more useful one; the reader seeking to know how the United Kingdom comes to be as it is is as likely to be interested in one aspect as another.
Conclusion: leave in both the Treaty of Perth and the 1948 Act. ariwara (talk) 00:25, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2008-01-04T00:25:00.000Z","author":"Ariwara","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Ariwara-2008-01-04T00:25:00.000Z-Treaty_of_Perth","replies":["c-Sony-youth-2008-01-05T11:13:00.000Z-Ariwara-2008-01-04T00:25:00.000Z"]}}-->
I'm not sure the flag of Norway historically accurate.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.159.104.62 (talk) 15:37, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2008-01-23T15:37:00.000Z","author":"86.159.104.62","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-86.159.104.62-2008-01-23T15:37:00.000Z-Treaty_of_Perth","replies":["c-125.237.69.27-2008-02-17T19:52:00.000Z-86.159.104.62-2008-01-23T15:37:00.000Z"]}}-->
I removed the flags; they cluttered the list, but, more importantly, many were anachronistic (e.g. the Welsh one, created in 1952 and the 19th century Norwegian one being used for medieval treaties). There was also a 'potential Northern Ireland flag' being used (whatever that means), and the flag of the President of Ireland was used to represent a 12th century treaty. The obsession with sticking flags onto everything was here triumphing over historical accuracy. Cop 663 (talk) 21:42, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2008-02-25T21:42:00.000Z","author":"Cop 663","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Cop_663-2008-02-25T21:42:00.000Z-Flags","replies":["c-Sony-youth-2008-02-25T22:57:00.000Z-Cop_663-2008-02-25T21:42:00.000Z"]}}-->
After much debate, the editors of the United Kingdom article seem to have settled on 1707 as being the foundation of the state (I note with concern though that this date lacks any external referencing, per official Wikipedia policy WP:VERIFY).
But this article - List of countries by formation dates - claims that the UK was actually founded in 1603 (again, completely unreferenced). Both articles cannot be correct, so which is it? Please come to the party armed with some proper external refs, because I am not sure if we can stomach yet another verbally diarrhetic Talk page splurge with largely consists of ad hominem attacks and statements of totally unsourced opinion. --Mais oui! (talk) 23:38, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2008-02-26T23:38:00.000Z","author":"Mais oui!","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Mais_oui!-2008-02-26T23:38:00.000Z-Date_of_formation_of_the_United_Kingdom?","replies":[]}}-->
This template is obviously mis-titled given that few of the laws it lists are in fact "personal [or] legislative unions of the constituent countries of the United Kingdom". Even if a better title could be found, I'm still not sure what the logic of including either the Statute of Westminster 1931 or the Republic of Ireland Act 1948. Neither of these Acts affected, in any way, the Constitutional position of the UK, but rather those of Commonwealth realms. — Blue-Haired Lawyer t 17:32, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-08-14T17:32:00.000Z","author":"Blue-Haired Lawyer","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Blue-Haired_Lawyer-2010-08-14T17:32:00.000Z-Problems_with_this_template","replies":["c-Rannph\u00e1irt\u00ed_anaithnid-2010-10-10T00:48:00.000Z-Blue-Haired_Lawyer-2010-08-14T17:32:00.000Z"]}}-->
I have removed the badge depicting England, Scotland and Ireland. It is inappropriate to include articles on Wales prior to its annexation to the Kingdom of England, without referencing its emblem. Daicaregos (talk) 09:38, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-01-31T09:38:00.000Z","author":"Daicaregos","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Daicaregos-2011-01-31T09:38:00.000Z-Badge","replies":["c-Sodacan-2011-01-31T09:46:00.000Z-Daicaregos-2011-01-31T09:38:00.000Z"]}}-->
The badge depicting England, Scotland and Ireland has been reinstated. the template includes two Government of Wales Acts. Unless the contention is that Wales is not a country, it should be included on the badge. Daicaregos (talk) 09:42, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-02-14T09:42:00.000Z","author":"Daicaregos","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Daicaregos-2011-02-14T09:42:00.000Z-Badge","replies":["c-Sodacan-2011-02-14T10:07:00.000Z-Daicaregos-2011-02-14T09:42:00.000Z"]}}-->
Something about this template as of 2019-08-07 is breaking Constitution of the United Kingdom. It appears that the template somehow begins its right-side box without ending it, causing the entirety of the Constitution of the United Kingdom article to stay within this box instead. --Closeapple (talk) 02:54, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2019-08-08T02:54:00.000Z","author":"Closeapple","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Closeapple-2019-08-08T02:54:00.000Z-Broken_formatting","replies":[]}}-->
Lokasi Pengunjung: 18.116.23.218