• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Channel Islands (1 Viewer)

jthoppes

spectacled spiderhunter
Discussion thread for Channel Islands. If you would like to add a comment, click the Post Reply button.

I would like to accomplish the following.

1. Remove the redundant category "British Isles." Our structure runs: Europe>UK>England, Scotland, Wales, etc.
It's probably easiest for the user to put the Channel Islands and Man under UK, but I'm willing to listen if anyone wants to insist that they are technically separate and should thus be in Category:Europe.

2. Move this entire page to the top of Category: Channel Islands.

3. Set up a disambig page to distinguish the Channel Islands that include Guernsey and Jersey from the Channel Islands where you might find an Island Scrub Jay.

Comments?
 
Last edited:
Oh yuk!

That was me put British Isles. mmmm can't remember what the status is of the Channel Islands now but um... have a feeling that they're not part of the UK:h?: and didn't want to upset anyone.

Actually due to this, how's about dropping 'UK' as a category and having British Isles instead?

I'll leave #2 & 3 for the more knowledgeable to answer

D
 
You are right they are not part of the UK but along wiht the Isle of Man are British Crown dependencies, they have their own legislation powers but are not Soverign nations in their own right, not part of the EU but they are all British Citizens - all very complex and probably does not help you with your dilemma.

Mark



Oh yuk!

That was me put British Isles. mmmm can't remember what the status is of the Channel Islands now but um... have a feeling that they're not part of the UK:h?: and didn't want to upset anyone.

Actually due to this, how's about dropping 'UK' as a category and having British Isles instead?

I'll leave #2 & 3 for the more knowledgeable to answer

D
 
I guess no one outside the UK knows that they are not part of it;) I would put them in the category UK and skip British Isles. This would be consistent with the rest of Europe.
I perfectly agree with your third point.

André
 
Interesting geo-political issue!

The Channel Islands, whilst "British", are, of course, much closer geographically to France. It therefore might seem odd to include them under "British Isles" or "UK", on the basis that its residents are British citizens. For comparison, take a French island in the Caribbean (e.g. Martinique) - that's hardly likely to be categorised for geo-scientific purposes as "France" or "Europe" simply because the islanders are French citizens. And the birds are probably unaware of the politics involved!

My preference would be to place the CI under Europe.

Cordialement
David
 
Oh dear, maybe the old English-French rivalry is back;).
David, we are talking about a distance of 150km, not thousands of km! Of course, the islands are closer to the mainland of France, but they are not so far away from England. With this logic we should also place Corsica under Europe, not under France (it's much closer to Italy). Also Lesvos or Rhodos. They are much closer to Turkey than to mainland Greece. So they should be under Asia perhaps....:eek!:

André
 
Good point Wintibird. You've made the case for putting the CI under France;)

I would never haved dared to do that for fear of stirring up hostilities entre les deux!

David
 
Whilst I think that British Isles is the best category for the Channel Isles to be in, as it is the proper geographical grouping, I think leaving (moving) them in (to) the UK category will make for a more streamlined feel to Opus. The bulk of the world takes 'British Isles' and 'United Kingdom' to be synonyms anyway.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 16 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top