Template talk:Sovereign states of Europe/Archive 1

message: The templates now say R. Macedonia or Republic of Macedonia. This discussion has been done to death and back on Talk:Republic of Macedonia. We may have to go back to FYR Macedonia if any of the other Macedonias become republics, which seems unlikely now. --GunnarRene 20:01, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Precisely. —Nightstallion (?) 13:01, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 2006 

message: Why is Cantus constantly reverting all these pages, without making a single comment here? Even Wik has participated in the talk page discussions. john 19:47, 5 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: You need to take a better look at this page, because I have made comments. -Cantus 19:52, 5 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Cantus

message: Can an admin please tweak the font sizes? I can't see the list of dependencies clearly. Thanks. ✑whkoh | ✖ 04:15, 30 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. --Cantus 07:00, 30 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Font size 

message: Votes: 16
Support: 100%
:Include in list.
:Note: A sizeble portion of Russia is in Europe (territory west of the Ural Mountains), while the rest is in Asia. European Turkey comprises territory to the west and north of the Bosporus and the Dardanelles; the rest is part of Asia.
Support
#Cantus - Both have well known territories in Europe.
#Zoney 09:10, 30 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it seems that combining Russia and Turkey in one poll is a little trick.--Nixer 22:07, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Russia]] & [[Turkey]]

message: Votes: 15
Support: 80%
:Include in list.
:Note: According to Whitaker's Almanack 2004 (page 2), World Book, and CIA - The World Factbook, but not Britannica, Azerbaijan lies partially in Europe, with the majority of the territory in Asia. It is a member of the Council of Europe.
Support
#Zoney 09:10, 30 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Absolutely right, its a shame to include Azerbaijan, while excluding the ancient european countries Armenia and Georgia. -- Europa 20:23, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

text: Maybe, but #Whitaker's Almanack 2004, World Book, and CIA - The World Factbook disagree. Pædia 15:11, 2004 Jun 17 (UTC)
Pity this is closed. There's no way Azerbaijan is in Europe! It has almost no part in European history -- none at all if it weren't for the Romans. Yes, these places do pass the European sports test but culturally they just do not feel European. Turkey has had long involvement in the affairs of Europe. Even it is rather borderline for inclusion. But Azerbaijan? Jeez.Dr Zen 11:44, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

text: I'm 100% in agreement with Dr. Zen (for once :-) here. Noel (talk) 21:01, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Azerbaijan]]

message: Votes: 12
Support: 0%
:List as a dependency.
:Note: World Book lists Azores as a dependency of Europe. Not listed as a dependency at CIA - The World Factbook.
Support
#Your signature
Oppose
#Pædia
#Zoney 22:08, 31 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Added to World Book link. --Cantus 23:43, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Azores]]

message: Votes: 12
Support: 100%
:List as a dependency.
:Note: Listed as a dependency at CIA - The World Factbook.
Support
#Rmhermen 16:57, 30 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It lies between Norway and Greenland. See the article. Warofdreams 18:42, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see #Svalbard and Jan Mayen. Pædia 06:16, 2004 Nov 15 (UTC)
I'm not sure we need to mention an uninhabited island. --Bjarki 13:45, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Jan Mayen]]

message: Votes: 66
Support: 70%
:Include in list.
:Note: According to World Book, but not Britannica nor CIA - The World Factbook, Georgia lies partially in Europe, with the majority of the territory in Asia. Georgia is a member of the Council of Europe.
Support
#Zoney 09:10, 30 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Proof added to World Book link. --Cantus 23:43, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)

text: It wants itself to be considered part of Europe, so why not be inclusive about it? Historically Georgia's shores were a part of European trade and civilisation. Aris Katsaris 21:10, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

text: That's not tue. Georgia is a member of the Council of Europe, an Egypt isn't. Maartenvdbent 20:31, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Georgia (country)|Georgia]]

message: According to this totally anonymous source, the limits are:
:These are conventional limits. North to south: Arctic Ocean, Zemlya Frantsa Iosifa (RUS), Novaya Zemlya (RUS), Vaygach (RUS), Sea of Kara, Kara River (RUS), Ural Mountains (RUS) and the Zhem River (Emba) (KAZ) (according to other sources, the Ural Mountains (RUS – KAZ) and the Zhayyq River (Ural) (RUS – KAZ)), the Caspian Sea shore (KAZ – RUS), Caucasus Mountains (RUS), the Black Sea shore (RUS – UCR – MOL – RUM - BUL – TUR), the Bosporus Strait (TUR), Dardanelles Strait (TUR) and the Aegean Sea.
--Cantus 05:47, 6 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Another source

message: Hi there,
Due to the duplication of countries in both EU and Europe footers, I created a new Template:European_countries_not_in_EU for those European countries not in the EU. This need only be put on pages which have the EU footer - other european countries should probably stick with this Europe footer.
Before I change all other EU country pages (I've only changed UK and Ireland), I'm just looking to see if there's any major objections?
Zoney 21:31, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Discussion at Template talk:EU countries Zoney 23:33, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other European footer 

message: It's a good idea to add Category:European countries here, but then the manually added copy in each of the pages that have it should be pruned, too. --Joy [shallot] 09:31, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category 

message: The current Europe page is very good in that respect - the list of european countries. It is the best! All things are taken into account, the disputable countries have explanation-footers, so both pro- and against- people should be content. If someone says something like "It is unthinkable to include Kazakhstan" - then this person should be capable of giving an exact explanation where (and why exactly there) in Russia the Europe border is, so that we can distinguish between Kazakshtan-bordering russian asian territories and around-the-europe-border russian territories. I don't think that it is good that we take the easy path of maximum convenience - "Russia is somehow european, no one disputes that, so we declare that Europe ends SOMEWHERE in Russia and we DON'T BOTHER where EXACTLY, it DOESN'T matter". Such thinking is too single-dimensional :)
We shouldn't try and decide on the borders of Europe. That would be like deciding that Napoleon was a liberator rather than a conqueror -- that's POV, right? Various sources outside Wikipedia disagree; I think we're required to report on the disagreement. A D Monroe III 23:14, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unneeded polls about including a territory into Europe 

message: Please, see vandalism by User:Caligvla, who removed four legitimate support votes for Armenia's inclusion in Template:Europe. 
I also suggest us to finally close these polls on Georgia and Armenia. Majority have already supported their inclusion in Template:Europe and there is no need to protract this already protracted poll even further.--Tabib 04:46, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC)
*Yep, it's fucking stupid when Azerbaidzhan is in while Georgia and Armenia (and Kazakhstan too) are not. How's the border between Europe and Asia should be jumping to evade these countries? That would surely attract topologist's attention - Jordan curve theorem is contradicted!  Grue  10:50, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Armenia and Georgia 

message: I think the EBU article gives a good idea of what should be in Europe. The EBU is obviously EU influenced and the "Members in Europe" includes Georgia, Turkey, Armenia, Moldova and others. Hedley 15:39, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[European Broadcasting Union]] 

message: Could someone, perhaps, create a map that would show where the European-Asian border is (including more than one theory as applicable) in regards to nearby countries, and then place this map here? That would certainly help a lot of people to make a more informed decision.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) 17:51, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)
:There are links to maps within this page. Yes, the maps aren't that great. —Cantus…☎ 02:22, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)
::Those are not exactly what I had in mind. My suggestion was to include just one map that would show all possible variants of the geographical border of Europe. Besides, if shown prominently on this page, it would be much more useful than well-hidden links to not-so-great maps we already have.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) 02:37, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)
:::See again here Transcontinental nation.Alinor 11:16, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: A map?

message: OK, it's obvious that the polling mechanism here hasn't really worked. The polls hovering inconclusively beetween 30 and 70% deserve to be put out of their misery. Couldn't there by a compromise 3rd footnote, reading something like "considered by some observers to belong to Europe, by others solely to Asia." ? Doops 18:26, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Compromise? 

message: Isn't it about time to wrap these two up and include them in the template? As others have noted, Azerbaijan and Turkey are already in the list, so what exactly is the hold up here? SouthernComfort 3 July 2005 05:20 (UTC)
I guess it's all about economy. Turkey and azerbaijan can offer oil and developed industries. I am not familiar with Armenia but Georgia does belong to Europe since Georgian culture is absolutely European. Nancy 3 July 2006 2:07 (USA)
:Neither Armenia, nor Georgia, Azerbaijan or Turkey belong to Europe. I don't understand! Is it a shame to be in Asia? -- tasc wordsdeeds 18:16, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Turkey was put here only because its poll was combined with Russia.--Nixer 11:07, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Armenia and Georgia - 2

message: *Look at the page Transcontinental nations for borders definitions, discussions, maps, etc.
*I mostly agree with the above two suggestions - the poll may take forever... Maybe the next time we should put a maximum lenght of 6 months and after that 50%+1vote should be sufficient for decision...
*I look at the current results in the following way: 1. if Russia and Turkey are to be included (they are voted YES already) - then the list is not 'exclusievely european', so the other states with european territory should get there - Kazakhstan (it is still in the poll) for sure (by even the mostly wrong definitions), Azerbaijan (voted YES already) and Georgia (still in the poll). 2. if Cyprus is included (voted YES already) - then Armenia (still in the poll) should be included too, becouse both countries are only culturally/historically/politically european and geographicaly belong to Asia. 3. if Azerbaijan is included (voted YES already) then Georgia (still in the poll) should be included too, becouse they are in the same group (in or out, but aways the same for these two) in all posible definitions of the border. 4. also, if Russia and Turkey are excluded (impossible now) - then Cyprus should be excluded too (and also all other debatable countries) - the list would become exclusievely european. 5. about the flag - the other continents have no flags, this flag is used by CoE/EU and they don't cover the whole continent, etc. - my personal opinion is to go without the flag (at least until all states join CoE or the EU).
*conclusion - the already achieved results (70%/30%) are enough to logicaly sort the remaining issues - it would be un-logical if the results of the remaining polls are opposite to the already closed polls - there would be contradictions, so we should take the results from the already closed polls and according to them - deal with the still open polls.Alinor 11:34, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Nightstallion 11:50, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  poll taking too much time 

message: Theathenae gave this reason for not using simply "Macedonia" in the template:
:"Macedonia is a region spanning several countries, not a single country."
This is also the case of "Moldova", most of the historical region of Moldova is outside the Republic of Moldova. Should we write "Republic of Moldova" instead of simply Moldova or do we have double standards ? :-) bogdan | Talk 20:18, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, the historical region is called Moldavia in English, and Moldova's name is not a matter of international dispute. If you want to talk double standards, explain why you say Moldova instead of Moldavia but insist on calling the FYROM Macedonia instead of Makedonija. In any case, Macedonia is an entirely separate article from FYROM.--Theathenae 20:37, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regions and countries 

message: There appear to be some misunderstanding about what the European Economic Area is regarding the last edit. EEA = EU + EFTA - Switzerland. None of those countries below the header "Members of the European Economic Area (EEE)" belongs to it. --Bjarki 21:44, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  EEA? 

message: What is the deal with this new footer for countries of europe?  Not only are these maps and geographical area subjective, but many countries and territories are left out.  Where is San Marino? Malta? Vatican City? Some of these grouping to not even make much sense. The simple list before, with explanations that some countries like russia and turkey had terriory in asia as well, and and listing of places like the faroe island and gibraltor, made so much more sense.  i think this new one is a shame, and might be taken as offensive, and is far less informative.--sterms 19:53, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree and have reverted to the old version. These templates are being phased out in favour of the international ties footers anyway. - SimonP 20:22, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

text: I agree, let's keep the A-Z version. -- User:Docu
===>See Africa I rearranged the information on all of the continent footers because of the format of Africa's - it looks more professional and appealing than the current one, plus it includes more information on a marginally larger area. Justin (koavf) 14:40, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  what is the deal with this new footer? 

message: I'm surprised there isn't a poll for Israel. If we should include countries (such as Armenia) that are only in some contexts considered part of Europe, Israel must be included as well. The Israeli Olympic Committee is a member of the European Olympic Committees  and so the country participates in European Championships in most sports. It's also in the Eurovision Song Contest since I don't know when. -- Jao 16:33, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't think sport would be a very relevant criterion. Australia is going to be a member of the Asia Football Conferderation, and play in the Asian Cup. Kazahkstan plays in the European Championships, but the East Asian Games too. Did I mention Israel once played the World Cup qualifiers with countries in Oceania, and South America and Africa? — Instantnood 16:54, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Israel 

message: Is a part of Europe! I don't understand why do you people keep removing it!--tasc 19:39, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Inserting Abkhazia, at least without a footnote explaining its circumstances, is POV. Also, if we mention Abkhazia, we'll have to mention South Ossetia, Transnistria and all the other de facto states which are officially recognised by all other EU countries (and every other country on earth) as part of another country already mentioned. --Latinus 19:43, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, I don't see any notes explaining gibraltar status for example. Why note is needed? Is it not enough that it belongs to other teritories section? Transnistria is good idea, btw. --tasc 19:51, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

text: If you look at the definition of what is included in that section, it links to List of dependent territories. Gibraltar is a dependent territory, Abkhazia, Transnistria et al are de facto states that are internationally recognised as being part other European states. Create a seperate section for them if you must, but stop implying that there is a legitimate country in Europe that goes under the name Abkhazia, or worse, a dependent territory. --Latinus 19:57, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Abkhazia 

message: Aren't these countries or territories geographically in Asia? I would place the footnote mark next to them, but I think it's a little too controversial to do arbitrarily. --Latinus 21:01, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: While Cyprus is reckoned to be a transcontinental territory, the island and constituents are approximate to the Asian mainland (with more than abundant citations of this) and, thus, appropriate to footnote as proposed.  (Also, harking of UN geographic categorisations, Cyprus is included in Western Asia.)  Take a glance at the table of Asian territories (and related note) for possible wording. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 16:15, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Cyprus]], [[Akrotiri and Dhekelia]], and the [[TRNC]]