Talk:List of members of the United Nations Security Council

message: Furthermore, the table is wrong - it lists each year they were in the council. However, countries are elected to two-year terms. --Golbez 02:04, Oct 17, 2004 (UTC)
:A half is elected each year. Maybe you could do a:
*2004-2005: Country1, Country2, etc.
*2003-2004: CountryX, CountryY, etc.
--Cantus 03:10, Oct 17, 2004 (UTC)
:I meant the table at the bottom; Brazil is listed as being in 18 times, which is true - 18 years means elected 9 times, though. --Golbez 04:35, Oct 17, 2004 (UTC)
Israel has never been elected?  It is a small country, but its population is larger than that of some other countries on the list, including Lebanon, Guinea-Bissau, Gabon, Mauritania, Bahrain, and Djibouti.
:Israel was never elected to the council, perhaps because of its regional grouping. Dave 22:59, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but it was never elected to the council. Dave 22:59, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: It'd be a good idea to have a formatted table to show the country's time they were elected.  It'd also solve the aforementionned problem.  Whatdy'all think? Dandin1 21:14, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, this is a better way to show the elected members. Dave 22:59, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's quite a nifty table, but from 1982 onwards the last two columns have been accidentally switched. Is there an easy way to repair this? Classical geographer (talk) 14:52, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It was surprisingly easy to fix, just undoing the vandalism of the last edit (removing Ireland?) fixed it again. --23230 talk 17:10, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! Classical geographer (talk) 09:25, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Formatted Table 

message: I'm thinking about changing the format of the list into a tabular form. I created as a first sketch this:
1946     	1946    	1946   	1946       	1946       	1946
Australia	Brazil  	Egypt  	Mexico     	Netherlands	Poland
1947     	1947    	1947   	1947       	1947       	1947
Australia	Belgium 	Brazil 	Colombia   	Poland     	Syria
1948     	1948    	1948   	1948       	1948       	1948
Australia	Belgium 	Brazil 	Colombia   	Syria      	Ukraine
1949     	1949    	1949   	1949       	1949       	1949
Argentina	Canada  	Cuba   	Egypt      	Norway     	Ukraine
1950     	1950    	1950   	1950       	1950       	1950
Cuba     	Ecuador 	Egypt  	India      	Norway     	Yugoslavia
1951     	1951    	1951   	1951       	1951       	1951
Brazil   	Ecuador 	India  	Netherlands	Turkey     	Yugoslavia
1952     	1952    	1952   	1952       	1952       	1952
Brazil   	Chile   	Greece 	Netherlands	Pakistan   	Turkey
1953     	1953    	1953   	1953       	1953       	1953
Chile    	Colombia	Denmark	Greece     	Lebanon    	Pakistan
1954     	1954    	1954   	1954       	1954       	1954
Brazil   	Colombia	Denmark	Lebanon    	New Zealand	Turkey
1955     	1955    	1955   	1955       	1955       	1955
         	        	       	           	           	
Few question:
*Should the first row be the current SC or the first one?
*Which format should I choose to represent countries and flags? Using the Template:Flagicon or the templates in Wikipedia:Country referencing templates? Thank you. CG 15:27, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improving the page 

message: On the map, Sumatra is coloured as if it is either independent from Indonesia, or perhaps the author mistakenly thought it was part of Malaysia. Either way it needs to be fixed, I'd do it myself but I'm not an expert on images wikipedia-wise. Perhaps someone more experienced could complete the necessary adjustments.
Basser g 20:13, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sumatra 

message: Would people support the use of flag templates on this article? doktorb wordsdeeds 16:17, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flags? 

message: I formatted User:Cedar-Guardian's table for all the years and added which seat the countries took. Unless anyone has any objections, I will replace the current list with it: User:Martin23230/UNSCtable
Martin23230 20:10, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Table 

message: Good link with information on this: http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/membship/electind.htm —Nightstallion 15:22, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  FYI 

message: why does germany include west but not east germany's tally? perhaps because the capital was Bonn initially?
In that case Yugoslavia should count for Serbia (with notes on the side), and Czech Rep should get Czechoslovakia's for Prague, amongst others?
Some terrible inconsistencies here. Lihaas (talk) 00:26, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The Federal Republic of Germany (there never was any such country as West Germany officially) existed before 1990, and exists today.  It absorbed the territory that contained the no longer existent country of the Democratic Republic of Germany (popularly, but unofficially, known as East Germany), but remains the same country.   When Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia ceased to exist, new (or at least restituted) countries took over their territories.  The location of the capitals are irrelevant: caital cities are not members of the UN. Kevin McE (talk) 17:18, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  germany 

message: As I finally finished all the details with the dates, I decided to add this list to the article. The only country I could not figure out whose colony it practically was and from when till when, is Papua New Guinea, so if someone could figure it out, please correct it according to the "from-to" form used. Another problem is that my sole source for the list was non other than Wikipedia. I tried to find the UNSC elections data on the UN sites, but failed, so the table is mostly blank considering that aspect, but I hope that can be helped in the near future. And as for the question of importance and notability - Israel and Saudi Arabia are some nice examples of countries that have been UN members for some time, are "relevant", but have never been on the UNSC.--Mátyás (talk) 11:45, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: PS: There should be a total of 192 currently existing countries on the two lists (members and non-members) together, but I always get lost in the counting... Could someone validate or disprove this somehow? Or is there a reliable method for such counting?--Mátyás (talk) 12:39, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-members 

message: To make things clear: the lists in this article should not contain any countries that are not UN members or haven't been historical UN members. As we cannot know about any future UN members, let us go with the current state of affairs, OK?--Mátyás (talk) 08:59, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Countries in the lists 

message: I note that the Polish equivalent of this article is now raised to FA status.  I don't read Polish, but it looks as though it has little if anything, other than a nice 2005 photo, that this does not have.  It appears to be recently started, with a translation of this.  So, is this good enough to submit for ranking, or are the expected standards not as high on pl.wiki? Kevin McE (talk) 18:40, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Status of article? 

message: The 2009 elections have passed, the new elected members are known. However, I see no change in the tables - are we waiting for New Years day for the new elected members to claim their seats? Or is it just a slow day?--Mátyás (talk) 10:31, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Which table?  The one headed Elections by year has been updated, because the elections are a historical fact.  The one entitled By number of years as Security Council member should not be updated before 1 Jan, because the newly elected nations have not increased their number of years on the SC "including current year where relevant" yet.  Your baby, the Non members table, should also remain as it is until the new year, because B&H is still not, as of today, a country that has been a member of the SC.  Kevin McE (talk) 18:39, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You do make sense. Then until New Years'...--Mátyás (talk) 16:51, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  When to update 

message: The table has no Arab country in the UNSC for 1967. First I thought it was an error, but the source gives the same. Seems the system was quite new (being established in 1966), and the UN wasn't consistent on the issue. Or? It is an anomaly, in any case...--Mátyás (talk) 08:44, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  No Arab for 1967? 

message: Kevin, why remove the dates of admission to the UN? And founder status? That way you could sort the countries to see who's been outside the UNSC the longest. Otherwise I agree with your edits.--Mátyás (talk) 16:03, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Ever since that list was in your sandbox I have been saying that it is unreasonable, bearing in mind the title of the article, to provide more detail on those nations that have never been members of the UNSC than those that have.  If Guatamala is elected at the end of next year, we would have the daft situation of presenting less info about the country in 2012 than we do now.  That is untenable, as I explained 18 months ago. Kevin McE (talk) 18:41, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

text: We could add admission dates to the members list. But then it would be rather cluttered... damn. Guess you are right. That would be just too much detail for this article. Info like that should go into each specific countries "Country and the UN" article.--Mátyás (talk) 19:31, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  New edits to Non-members table 

message: http://www.unelections.org/?q=node/33
Actually says that being a small country is a negative factor when considering candidates, etc. Should be included and processed.--Mátyás (talk) 09:12, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Source 

message: http://www.greeceun.org/greeceun/content/Folder.aspx?d=3&rd=-1&f=1326&rf=840755231&m=-1&rm=0&l=1
Yes, Greece wants a seat on the UNSC in 2025-26... so I don't know where to put that info, if anyplace, should it be put somewhere in the election articles or put it here in the Future Candidacies section or what. Thoughts? --Mátyás (talk) 09:20, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll just put it here then.--Mátyás (talk) 12:18, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Greece planning ahead 

message: The map under the current members table seems to indicate that both PRC and ROC are members.
198.151.130.131 (talk) 22:13, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, it indicates that Taiwan is a part of the People's Republic of China. This is the position of the UN. --... there's more than what can be linked. 10:16, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map 

message: Those countries that are to take their place on the SC on 2012 should not, I would contend, be shown on the list of members by year.  At present, they are not members, and anyone looking at the table without paying proper attention to the years column could be mislead in that regard.  We already have them indicated clearly elsewhere on the article as elected to be on the council from January.  Logical consistency would require that, if we are going to post what we know about next year's membership of the council, we should also post what we know about 2013's composition.  But I don't think we should be doing either.  Kevin McE (talk) 12:32, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Future members in Membership by year section 

message: This table does not sort, even though it is set to be a sortable table. Any ideas how to fix this problem? --... there's more than what can be linked. 15:46, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Kevin McE (talk) 00:10, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  By Years table not sorting 

message: Can we have a table for that? –HTD 06:36, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free. Kevin McE (talk) 09:34, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number of times elected 

message: Lithuania should be in green on the firs map.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.85.84.115 (talk) 17:01, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong map (2015 composition) 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on List of members of the United Nations Security Council. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090406073932/http://www.seebiz.eu:80/hr/politika/tadic-kandidovacemo-se-za-poziciju-u-savetu-bezbednosti,27750.html to http://www.seebiz.eu/hr/politika/tadic-kandidovacemo-se-za-poziciju-u-savetu-bezbednosti,27750.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:56, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I don't see the point of saying that France replaced the French Fourth Republic.--Jack Upland (talk) 21:27, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  France 

message: The map legend on this page and the legend on the page for the image itself are in disagreement, including different explanations for same item and items present only on one:
Color	Image legend                                    	Article legend
     	The African Group                               	African Group
     	The Asian Group                                 	Asia-Pacific Group
     	The Eastern European Group                      	Eastern European Group
     	The Latin American and Caribbean States (GRULAC)	Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
     	The Western European and Others Group (WEOG)    	Western European and Others Group
     	UN member not in any voting group               	UN member not in any voting group
     	Observer states                                 	-
     	Disputed territory                              	Non-UN state or territory
The main difference is the lack of observer states for bright green in the article legend (they are marked on the image) and "disputed" vs "non-UN" for grey.
While the Observers are obviously just omitted, I cannot verify which of the Disputed/Non-UN interpretations is the correct one.
MreeBiPolar (talk) 14:59, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Given that the Western Sahara is the only territory coloured grey, both of these labels are accurate. The official UN position is that the Western Sahara is a non self-governing territory under Spanish administration, making it non-UN territory. On the other hand, both Morocco and the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic claim the entirety of the territory, so the disputed label works just as well. Sir Sputnik (talk) 15:15, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Regional Groups" section map legend discrepancy 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of members of the United Nations Security Council. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://thecommonwealth.org/sites/default/files/Finline/CommonwealthCandidatureChartNovember112013.doc
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120309133847/http://www.irelandunnewyork.org/home/index.aspx?id=81389 to http://www.irelandunnewyork.org/home/index.aspx?id=81389
*Added  tag to http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/ud/documents/propositions-and-reports/reports-to-the-storting/2011-2012/meld-st-33-20112012-2/3/2.html?id=717920
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:17, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Question: Why was Ukraine in the Eastern Europe seat from 1948-1949? It was a S.S.R at the time, not an independent nation.
RedRiver660 (talk) 22:52, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Which is why there is an explanatory note in the list of members.  Same thing applied to Byelorussian SSR in '74-5.  They were UN members in their own right. Kevin McE (talk) 09:43, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  1948-49 Ukraine  

message: Just to clarify, should the newly elected, not yet serving non-permanent members be included in the current membership section, or should a separate section be added to accommodate them? Klohinx (talk) 06:59, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: No, those who are not current members should not be listed as current members.  What will happen in the future should be in a section about future members.  Kevin McE (talk) 21:22, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current membership 

message: In the "Chinese Seat" column of the "Permanent" table in the "Membership by Year" section of the article, the ROC is split into two different periods because of the fact they moved from being the sovergein nation in Mainland China to the one known as Taiwan. Even though this is historically correct, this should probably be clarified by adding "Taiwan" after "ROC" in the second period, no?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sir Patoot (talk • contribs) 10:07, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chinese Membership in Membership by Year Ambiguous naming