Talk:Political union

message: isnt the former USSR an example?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.237.54.62 (talk) 03:47, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: USSR

message: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_empire  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.220.49.202 (talk) 05:14, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Mexican Empire?

message: Is EU a political union, or just a form of economic union?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 00:50, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is EU a pu?

message: Isn't the USA an example? Or is being a confederation completely different to a political union? -Tene 22:10, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The USA is a federation. Wouter Lievens 12:36, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What about the relationship between the USA and the Compact of Free Association nations of the Marshall Islands,the Federated States of Micronesia, and Palau, as well as the Northern Mariana Islands.  Would these nations be considers as having a political union with the United States? -24.149.203.34 (talk) 21:08, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: USA

message: I've removed the category political science form this article, because it has no or little links to political science, it should be in (a subcat) of politics, not political science. Furthermore Serbia & Montenegro is no longer a country and the United Kingdom is devolved state and not a political union. user:Mais oui! reverted my edits without explanation, I'm reverting it. C mon 00:00, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reversion

message: The Commonwealth Confederation should be added to this list.  Several options have been proposed, however the UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand is the usual list of potential members.  Other options include all members of the Commonwealth Realm, or all memebers of the Commonwealth of Nations.  Some lists include non-Commonwealth areas such as Ireland, The USA, and Israel.68.148.123.76 (talk) 10:36, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Reunification Movements

message: Ooops, it think people have gotten carried away here. Under a heading saying that there are/have been irrendentist movements to re-unite these countries, we get a series of links leading articles that only say that these countries were linked at one point in history, NOT that there are active movements to reunite them.  This is not the same thing. I have asked for citations that some of these movements actually exist/have existed. Some of those highlighted are pretty far-fetched (Anglo-Irish? Trans-Caucasian? Really?) Indisciplined (talk) 20:09, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This entire section is completely unsourced and I doubt its relevance. The first sentence does not represent the content (EU irredentist/nationalistic?!). I also agree with the previous comment, but I think the confusion comes from including the content here (most wikilinks are dubious too, eg linking simply to a country). I was going to propose a split in a different article, but that would have to be trimmed too, although maybe it is worth a try; otherwise I am in favour of completely removing this section from this article. Antipastor (talk) 18:38, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Speaking of far-fetched...why are the Congos in there? Just because the two countries share the same name (because of the river), doesn't mean their citizens are even thinking about a union. I removed it. Night w (talk) 03:44, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I found some "not so clear" sources, but looks like some people support the idea of the "Only One Congo". They share the same people, some traditions and native language (not talking about French), and the two capitals have close relations. I didn't put it back on the list because I'm still looking for reliable sources, but if someone find it (or would like to contribute on the discussion), be welcome. Regards. Gvogas (talk) 17:10, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Reunification movements

message: This article cites that the Chinese Reunification took place in 1949. While in 1912 reunification did occur, 1949 was when the Nationalists separated from the PRC and moved to Taiwan. I would not call this a reunification because while the PRC maintains nominal control of the island of Taiwan, the ROC is the defacto government of Taiwan.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.75.137.56 (talk) 20:43, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: ROC & PRC

message: *
What two realms would that be?  Aragon and Valencia? —Tamfang (talk) 08:01, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spain 

message: . 223.184.183.112 (talk) 02:52, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mustafa 

message: I've added a "dubious" tag to the assertion from Ryan that all cases of voluntary unification since the early 19th century were between states that spoke the same language.  Three counter-examples which come to mind:  Switzerland (1848 - German, French, Romansh);  Canada (1867 - French and English);  Italy (1871 - variety of regional languages).  I don't have access to the Ryan article, so not sure how to review this point? Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 15:11, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:   states that spoke the same languages