Talk:Channel Islands

So, I changed the name of this article to conform to the Project:article naming conventions. We disambiguation first on what a thing is, then on its next biggest container. So, the CIs are contained by the UK, and that's how this works. --(WT-en) Evan 07:34, 28 Nov 2003 (PST)

I know, I always tend to be precise and technically correct. For some things this is an asset, for others not. If contained includes dependencies, then I have nothing against this title. I just named it Channel Islands (United Kingdom dependency) because they are not part of the UK proper. But that was a bit too far-fetched, I suppose. :-) (WT-en) DhDh 13:34, 28 Nov 2003 (PST)

Oh. Heh. Working from ignorance here. Would Channel Islands (British Isles) be better? If they're not really part of the UK, maybe we should disambig these countries (uh... or whatever they are) with their continental section instead? Also, I changed Channel Islands (United States of America). Although California's Channel Islands are in fact a geological unit, as travel destinations Channel Islands National Park and Santa Catalina Island are quite different, and two of the islands are US Navy bombing test sites that travelers probably aren't going to go to, anyways. -- (WT-en) Evan 13:51, 28 Nov 2003 (PST)

I think we've got an interesting case here. I don't think Channel Islands (British Isles) would be correct either, because they're situated just off the French coast. My Times world atlas treats them as a separate territory, so they could be called Channel Islands (Europe), but don't you think this is a bit too vague? Actually, I'd go for the present title. "(United Kingdom)" doesn't necessarily mean that they are part of the UK, and on most maps this is also the way to indicate dependencies (e.g. Saint Martin (France) and Sint Maarten (Netherlands)). (WT-en) DhDh 14:44, 28 Nov 2003 (PST)

I've come to the debate late in the day because I've just visited this article and immediately alarm bells rang that the title was wrong. "(United Kingdom)" is misleading. For some years I was responsible for the Channel Islands as part of a voluntary organisation and this was a matter of some sensitivity to some locals since they have their own governments and are often erroneously treated as being owned by the UK. "(British Isles)" is the preferred usage, from what locals have said to me, although I admit that some sources include the CI in that geographic term while others don't. (WT-en) Andyfarrell 09:28, 9 October 2007 (EDT)

This should change, because the islands are definitely not a part of the United Kingdom. What about moving this page to just Channel Islands? I'd think these Channel Islands are by far the most famous ones. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 13:56, 28 September 2011 (EDT)