Template talk:Sovereign states of Europe/Archive 2

message: I propose to bring this template uptodate with terms used in List of countries. This would mean either adding a new line Special entities:  Åland | Svalbard. Or alternatively changing Other territories:  into Other territories and entities:  and adding Åland.  (NB. the above votes on Åland, etc. are no longer relevant as the word dependency is not used anymore) --Trainthh 23:31, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update proposal for subheadings and adding Åland 

message: What about Kosovo? 
It is not a full part of Serbia it is not recognized as an independent entity. --Goran.Smith2 09:39, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kosovo 

message: Armenian is clearly NOT in Europe, it is in Asia (the Middle East) and part of Asian culture because it's IN ASIA.
Wikipedia should be a source of factual information not a place for wishfull thinking and geopolitical agendas
Please remove Armenia and all non European nations from this area. Just because many Armenians don't like their Middle Eastern neighbors doesn't give them the right to re-draw the map. I am sorry some Armenians don't like being in Asia, but there are MANY Armenians who are proud of their true heritage and freely admit being and Asian nation. Don't let a few self-haters tarnish and distort the truth of Armenia's geographic location. --Calgvla 08:45, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Many Armenians want to be considered European. Many Western-European names, such as Robert, Ruchard, Karen, Pierre, Ronald, Harry, Edmond, very popular in Armenia. But having European name still does not make European.--Nixer 14:01, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

text: This is very similar to the Turks. In their quest to distance themselves from their largely Islamic neighbours, they choose to downplay their long and obvious affinity with the Asian landmass, and emphasize purely on looking west. I faces issues in Airline destinations‎ for the same reason....pro-European activists both in the countries in question and amongst Europeans keen to see an expanded EU attempting to classify more and more of these countries under Europe at the expense of Asia.--Huaiwei 17:46, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Many Europeans don't consider Turkey to be culturally and historically European. Are they pro-Europe? — Instantnood 20:35, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: At whom is this irrelevant question directed at?--Huaiwei 08:07, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Turkey is geographicaly in Asia and has been considered European even in international treaties. As for Armenia and Cyprus, these are geographicaly in asia even though they are considered european in international treaties. So... I do not see a reason why either three cant belong here. In fact I do not see the point of this debate. --Cat out 12:37, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Turkey should be in "countries of europe" template indeed. Because she really has soil in Europe continent. But i dont think she's european in politics. Some sick EU candidateship meetings (which are only a game for some parties to get higher votes from turkish immigrants in elections) doesnt approve this. CONCLUSION: Europe is a continent that Turkey is in. Europe is an entity where Turkey is not in (an entity which she must run away with no looking at back) --JohnEmerald 16:23, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fascinating argument. However, this is a debate that's been going on since the Middle Ages and earlier. Different people come to different conclusions using different criteria. For Wikipedia's purposes, it is convenient to Group Turkey, Cyprus, etc with Europe. It isn't a matter of Truth™ or something like that, just an editorial convenience. The fact is that there is no accepted Truth about where Europe ends and Asia begins. Did you know that the Western World thought it ended at Germany's eastern border before? Just one example of how relative, and how culturally-dependent one person's convictions about this geographically and politically ambiguous area is. — Saxifrage ✎ 16:44, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Armenia 

message: Well, somebody rv ed me when I was trying to incude Ichkeria in the template. Ok, in Abkhazia, there is a de jure government, located in Kodori gorge and there is a de dacto Sokhumi based separatist govt. The same comparion would apply to Chechnya. If we delete Chechen Republic we should delete the Abkhzia separatist republic as well or vice versa if we wonna keep Chechenya we gotta keep Abkhazia too. Sosomk 22:55, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: we don't delete chechnya, we just don't include it. -- tasc wordsdeeds 22:58, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why? What is the criteria? Can you explain in a civil manner. Sosomk 23:01, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not an unrecognized country. -- tasc wordsdeeds 23:02, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it is [] [] Sosomk 23:03, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Soso does make a valid point here. In my opinion though, all pseudo-states should be removed, this template should be about actual countries, not entities in the process of becoming countries (Montenegro was an unrecognized state shortly after the declaration of independence).--Tekleni 07:21, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So, how do you define which country is real and which is not? By the fact that it's not recognized by someone? -- tasc wordsdeeds 07:23, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: By its membership of the UN. Taiwan not a member, yet is recognized by 24 member states, and is classified as a so-called "unrecognized state" on Wikipedia. Israel OTOH is a member of the UN, yet is not recognized by 24 other member states. Why is Taiwan an "unrecognized state" and Israel isn't? By the number of states recognizing them? Where do you draw the line?--Tekleni 07:29, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: don't really understand what taiwan and israel has to do with it. From wp pov they both Partially unrecognized states. anyway we certainly don't draw the line across neither recognized, nor un member, nor controlling any territory entities. -- tasc wordsdeeds 07:34, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well then why not include Sealand (see #Sealand)? De facto control is subjective. Do you think that any of these "puppet statelets" could survive on their own without some backing (whether it's Turkey backing the TRNC or Russia backing South Ossetia). Believe me, they'd starve; these are cases of foreign military occupation masquerading as states. You think the South Ossetian separatist authorities control its territory? Wrong, Russia controls its territory.--Tekleni 07:40, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Than we probably should also exclude Georgia as it doesn't control territory it claims? -- tasc wordsdeeds 07:43, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is where the UN membership and recognition come into play. Serbia doesn't control all the territory it claims either. Why not include Kosovo as well?--Tekleni 07:46, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not. if majority editors agrees. -- tasc wordsdeeds 07:48, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I don't know if this comment is helpful, but I parcipated very briefly in a discussion on another talk page related to the unrecognized country issue. ne of the other posters over there pointed out that these places are all listed in Wikipedia already. They are on: List of countries as unrecognized countries. They are also on List of sovereign states. Of course also on  List of unrecognized countries which is what we link to. There has already been extensively discussion on those Talk pages and Wikipedia-wide editor consensus was reached. It is always best to seek consistency on the whole encyclopedia. - Pernambuco 13:21, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Abkhzia vs. Chechnya