Talk:Irredentism

Ireland should be in the "constitutional" section

Since a irredentist desire is in the constitution of the Republic of Ireland it is in the wrong section. The change in 1999 removed the territorial claim, but did not remove the irredentist desire from its constitution: Articles_2_and_3_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland

"Article 2

   It is the entitlement and birthright of every person born in the island of Ireland, which includes its islands and seas, to be part of the Irish Nation. That is also the entitlement of all persons otherwise qualified in accordance with law to be citizens of Ireland. Furthermore, the Irish nation cherishes its special affinity with people of Irish ancestry living abroad who share its cultural identity and heritage.

Article 3

       It is the firm will of the Irish Nation, in harmony and friendship, to unite all the people who share the territory of the island of Ireland, in all the diversity of their identities and traditions"

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cielquiparle (talk) 01:50, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that irredentism has been an influential force in world politics since the 19th century even though international law is hostile to it? Source:
  • ALT1: ... that anocratic regimes are more likely to engage in irredentism than democracies? Source:
  • ALT2: ... that Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014 is an example of irredentism? Source:
  • ALT3: ... that ethnically homogeneous states are more likely to engage in irredentism? Source:
  • Reviewed: Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Paper_fortune_teller
  • Comment:

References

Sources

• Siroky, David S.; Hale, Christopher W. (January 2017). "Inside Irredentism: A Global Empirical Analysis: Inside Irredentism". American Journal of Political Science. 61 (1): 117–128. doi:10.1111/ajps.12271.
• Kornprobst, Markus (2008). Irredentism in European Politics: Argumentation, Compromise and Norms. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521895583.
• Griffiths, Martin; O'Callaghan, Terry; Roach, Steven C. (2008). International Relations: The Key Concepts. Taylor & Francis. pp. 175–177. ISBN 9780415774369.

Improved to Good Article status by Phlsph7 (talk). Self-nominated at 11:18, 3 August 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Irredentism; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

• Recently achieved GA status, meets length criteria and meets requirements of WP:NPOV. I have had limited involvement with this article in one key area, so would suggest a 2nd opinion before promoting. WCM_email 12:41, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Religiously motivated irredentism

Should there be a mention of irredentism motivated by the belief that it is the will of God, or a divine being? Greater Israel clearly falls into this category, as do (arguably) certain variants of the Moscow as the Third Rome and Akhand Bharat concepts. 2604:2D80:6984:3800:0:0:0:6466 (talk) 03:08, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello and thanks for the suggestion. It's true that there are some cases where irredentism is linked to religion. However, religious irredentism does not seem to be a major category in the academic literature on the subject, at least not in the overview sources that I'm aware of. But if you have a good source on the subject then I could take a look at it. Phlsph7 (talk) 07:57, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

real world examples

Why is there no discussion of Israel and Palestinian irredentism? 216.67.40.181 (talk) 23:27, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello 216.67.40.181 and thanks for raising this issue. The Israel-Palestinian conflict is not the most typical form of irredentism and this article is not meant to provide a comprehensive list of all irredentist conflicts. But the page List of irredentist claims or disputes might interest you since it has a section on this conflict. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:39, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Definition as wish for "annexation" is wrong

The current unreferenced definition citing simple annexation of territory is wrong. It is what is claimed to be recovery of "lost" ("unredeemed") territory. For example, the US intention to annexe Greenland "because we need it" is not irredentist - the US never owned Greenland. I edited the article to include this, with a reliable source, but it has been reverted. Best wishes, Pol098 (talk) 15:08, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello Pol098 and thanks for your input. The information in the current lead sentence is not uncited: it summarizes information from the definition section, see MOS:LEADCITE. The term "annex" is directly supported by reference there to White & Millett 2019: Irredentism: The desire to annex adjacent land to a state... You are right that not any annexation counts as irredentism. This is covered in the 2nd lead sentence. If you are concerned that the first sentence may be interpreted as implying that any annexation counts as irredentism, we could rephrase it to "Irredentism is a desire for one state to annex..." to avoid that possibility. Phlsph7 (talk) 17:17, 2 June 2026 (UTC)