Talk:Southern Europe

message: Corsica is not French ethnic, it is italian ethnic. There are many problems of independence of Corsica. It is the French colony. 
The Mistral is a cold wind blowing over the south of France and therefore did not has the same climate as southern Europe. 
The French population are Celtic from northern europe.
Nice and Monaco are in the Italian region. They are populated by Italians and much possess Italian names.
The only areas that can be considered as southern europe in France are the Nice region and Corsica today administered by France.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Julio188red (talk • contribs) 05:49, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  FRANCE 

message: Turkey is not Europe and any references must be deleted from the article  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.33.251.173 (talk) 20:23, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: East Thrace (the westernmost province of Turkey) certainly is, and that is shown correctly on the accompanying map.  If you are trying to make a political point, this is not the place to do it.  --Wally Tharg (talk) 08:38, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Turkey is not Europe

message: Outside the fact that the name of this map is not in adequation (does not fit with any political border, neither national or not even regional),   What is the object of this map?  If the criterium is the climate situation (as we ccould understand when seing the strong red in the regions of mediterranean climate in the south-east of France)
there is absolutly no reason that south-western France is marqued in light red when northern Spain and northern Italy are in strong red:  south-west France has same climate than northern Spain (Atlantic coast) and is situated as much south (if not more)  than central and northern Italy.  Culturally speaking south-western France is not less "southern European" than south-east France.  There is no reason to exclud south-west France (midi-pyrénées, Aquitaine).  The logic would be that south west france is dark red like the other European regions situated at the same latitudes.
Then in light red we could include Lyon area, Auvergne, Limousin, Poitou-Charentes: these regions are situated at same latitudes than Alpine Italy and shows southern French features (such as roman roofs) but also traditionally Occitan (Auvergne, Limousin) or Franco-provençal languages (Lyon, Savoie, southern Burgondy).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.224.59.166 (talk) 18:12, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Map  called "geo-political southern Europe"

message: I notice that this article has changed towards views that exclude France in the definitions where that country abviously belongs, in both culture, language and geography. I try to bring new addings to correct that obviously volontary prejudice.
Also, the climatic definition seemed to be rather selective: some areas without mediterranean climate (romania, bulgaria, bigs parts of Spain or Northern Italy are included in this "climatic" definition of southern Europe... but once again the person who has modified the article erase the references areas of similar climate in France, just because they are located in France... (even when they still are located clearly in the southern half of Europe: Rhone Valley, Midi-Pyrénnées, Auvergne, Limousin, south-west, etc...), in line with Italy.  On one side of the Alps (because it is Italy the areas are included in the concept, when its transalpine areas, often with milder climate are excluded. Just because the author thinks that France, for obscure reasons shouln't be in any way southern European. I'll try to correct this unfair (and probably politically-oriented) bias.
Also, there were once a serie of very good and instructive illustrations that showed about how can be defined teh concept following each point of view (geographic, mediterranean climate, moutains/relief, wine culture, Romance languages, relief, southern European roofings, etc).  I can see that the person that removed all the illustrations that didn't followed his own biaised views (all the definitions that showed that France fully of in great part belong to southern Europe, and that seems to bother him.)  -  I'll try to find them again, they were very instructive and clear to understand.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.174.127.3 (talk) 11:44, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why so many bad modifications?? prejudice against France? 

message: Most of the above (maybe all ... I lost the will to wade through all of it) is political and cultural, sensu lato (e.g. building styles).  The problem is that the article also has biological and ecological importance.  Many articles discussing the distribution of species (e.g. the Jersey tiger moth) link to this one, and the person who follows the link will be misled when they are told "definitively" that southern France (for example) is not included.  All of France south of the Massif Central is biologically Southern Europe.  
To cut a long story short, the definition of Southern Europe depends on the purposes for which it is being discussed.  For ecology, France is part Southern and part Northern. Why cannot a country be split?  --Wally Tharg (talk) 08:52, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: A biological problem

message: Seeing all the spats about European sub-divisions (Europe is quite small for dividing!), I have decided to contact the UN and as what they think abou the fact that their geoscheme is so extensively used on Wiki. This is what I received:
Dear xxxxx,
Thank you for your email.
The geographical groupings used by the United Nations Statistics Division follow the M49 Standard for Area Codes for Statistical use, details of which can be found here: http://unstats.un.org/unsd/methods/m49/m49.htm
The designations employed and the presentation of material at this site do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The assignment of countries or areas to specific groupings is for statistical convenience and does not imply any assumption regarding political or other affiliation of countries or territories by the United Nations.
"Regions" are so drawn as to obtain greater homogeneity in sizes of population, demographic circumstances and accuracy of demographic statistics (another example is Russia -- it is in the continent of Asia but it belongs in the Eastern Europe "region"). This nomenclature is widely used in international statistics but it is by no means universal.
I hope this is useful.
Best regards,
The UN Demographic Yearbook Team.
It seems Wikipedia abuses the geoscheme, while there is actually an openly proposed geoscheme by the Geographical sub-division:
http://unstats.un.org/unsd/geoinfo/ungegn/docs/23-gegn/wp/gegn23wp48.pdf
--131.251.133.25 (talk) 11:47, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent email response, in my opinion. I also think the UN statistical division of Europe should not be used in Wikipedia as it is simple not a barometer of defining the boundaries of Europe. If nobody responds to this in the next couple of days, I'll have the UN section removed from this article. --Nadia (Kutsuit) (talk) 10:00, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  response from the UN 

message: listing kosovo as a 'country' of southern europe is dubious at best
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recognition_of_Kosovo  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.135.108.254 (talk) 11:04, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  kosovo is listed as a country, which is a dubious claim 

message: so since my last message was removed for being too "vulgar" and attacking wally tharg. i'll say this as nicely as i can. turkey is not in europe so please get it right. it is definitely! not in southern europe. turkey is in the middle east(asia) or west asia, only 3% is further than west asia but no way is it in europe. you could however say, it is NEAR east europe — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.74.199.31 (talk) 
:First of all, please sign your comments next time. Secondly, please don't insult other Wikipedia members next time or you may be blocked from editing. Don't insult anyone or anything, for that matter. Thirdly, your view regarding Turkey is your personal opinion and has no place in an encyclopedia. --Nadia (Kutsuit) (talk) 14:22, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  turkey is not in europe 

message: Can someone add Bulgaria to the 'Turkic Languages' list, under 'Small Communities'? Thanks. AuditoreEzio (talk) 01:37, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  November 30 edit request 

message: Why did you guys omit Turkey and Turkish people in almost every part of this article? What I mean: 
Why didn't you add the population of European Turkey in the population section? 
Why did you exclude Istanbul in the largest urban areas section? 
Why doesn't Ataturk International Airport exist in the busiest airports list? 
Why didn't you add Turkish language in the languages list? Turkish language has about 12 million speakers in European Turkey alone. In addition to that, there are significant numbers of Turkish speakers in the other Southeastern European countries too. Such as Turks of Western Thrace, Turks of Bulgaria, Turks of Romania, Turks of Kosovo, Turks of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Turks of Croatia, Turks of Montenegro and also Turkish Cypriots (Even though Cyprus isn't geographically Europe at all, the article refers to it as a Southern European country, and you added the Greek Cypriots to the total number of Greek speakers in Southern Europe. So then, you have to consider the Turkish Cypriots as a South European population as well.) 
"Additionally, there are countries in the eastern part of Southern Europe (e.g., Bosnia, Albania), where Islam is widely practiced." Again, no mentioning of Turkey.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.146.21.232 (talk) 01:28, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some questions about Turkey 

message: Weather you like it or not (:
::::OK lets talk about this here.  I agree with you, partially. The current version is ok to me: Since France is fully within Western europe, it is ok to indicate South France (Only southern France) within SouthWestern Europe.  This is a common point of view: just look at this page: Northwestern Europe .
Barjimoa (talk) 09:33, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sub-Loirean France is definitely Southern Europe 

message: @Julio188red What are you doing? Did you really need to mass revert several edits to remove one line of text? Regardless, it has been included for a long time. Discuss before making changes. Rob984 (talk) 16:33, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: a procedural note: I have reverted your changes until a consensus is reached here on the talk page per WP:BRD. This gives everyone a chance to comment on the proposed changes. Vrac (talk) 18:31, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

text: Comment on the content issue: the Encyclopedia of Social and Cultural Anthropology, a well-cited source, includes southern France in the definition of southern Europe. Vrac (talk) 18:54, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: OECD, UN, CIA, Eurovoc and all international organisations are ranking France as a western country and not a southern one. It can't be allowed to divide a country into different section, otherwise, that would lead to a massive redesigning of the European map. Shall we cut Italy into a Central European country for the north, and a southern one, same for Germany, northern or central or western, let's cut it in three parts... All the map included in the article are furthermore placing France the same category. One cannot change the classification without real sourcing from a neutral and reliable source. In all the international classifications France is not a southern.country, not is is divided in different parts.--Gabriel HM (talk) 01:06, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I confess that I don't understand your argument. Southern Europe is not an administrative division; as the article explains it is a grouping made on different levels, none of which are official.  Splitting up a country makes no difference in this context, it is a grouping made for intellectual purposes.  Note that the article splits northern and southern Italy.  As for OECD or CIA ranking France as a western country, those classifications aren't relevant to this grouping. Isn't Spain considered a western country by the OECD?  Isn't Spain considered part of southern Europe? As for your comment on sourcing, I cited one above but you appear to have missed it so here it is again: . Vrac (talk) 01:52, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

text: Gabriel, I dont see the problem. Not all of France is listed. I agree with Vrac (talk): Southern Europe is not an administrative division. It is already allowed to divide a country into different sections. Germany is listed both in Western Europe and Central Europe. Northern Germany is included in Northern Europe. Central Europe and North Italy. Russia is clearly both in Eastern Europe and Northern Asia despite what the UN map says. It is full of examples. Barjimoa (talk) 06:47, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: , please name several recognised sources such as OECD, UN, CIA, etc to justify your assertion. I just need real sourcing.--Gabriel HM (talk) 11:29, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  France 

message: I think there is some rigged built-in clauses where lots of UN buildings/HQs/confrenses HAVE TO be conducted within France!
I think there is also something like a (guideline/law) about the use of the wording: "Northern" anent describing and showing Europe nations. Done to make France not seem so 'Southern' 
Another weird thing I have come up against (to do with the aforesaid), is finding maps of Europe with decent amount of latitude lines. The spaces between latitude lines on maps of Europe are far to much spaced-out. Again, I believe this is engineered to make France seem somehow just to the west of Germany when in fact it lies (as a whole) much further to the south of Germany.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.121.254.236 (talk) 16:58, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Most are based on equal area polar stereographic projections (such a this) which have had their longitude–latitude lines removed. Because they are centered on Germany, they make countries such as France and England look further north than they are. I'm pretty such this has caused misconceptions, which are now deeply engraved unfortunately. I'm trying to replace them with orthographic projections, for example :File:Europe orthographic Caucasus Urals boundary (with borders).svg and :File:EU-France.svg. These hopefully show the curvature of the Earth, thus not misleading the viewer. Rob984 (talk) 17:18, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why one can only find maps of Europe with overly spaced-out latitude lines... 

message: Look how much further south French cities are compared to Ireland/Britain/Belgium/Netherlands/Luxemburg/Germany/Denmark...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_latitude  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.121.254.236 (talk) 23:34, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cities by latitude show France as very southern set 

message: Weather and habitat seems alike enough for vultures which be very exotic animal by northern European standards.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.197.75.50 (talk) 19:55, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sure of course, these is no culture in  Germany 😂 , and the Bearded vulture, is not present in Autria and Bavaria... In your obession about anything French, your assertions are more and more biased. I shall warn you that insults and depreciation of people or country is forbidden in WP . (Your comments about the frenchs compared to monkeys, and much more). WP is not built to express your obsession of French speaking peoples on the talk pages.--Gabriel HM (talk) 15:32, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vultures share the same habitats they find in France and Spain 

message: This article has nothing about the modern economic crisis, or PIGS.Greeninventor999 (talk) 00:52, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Economic Crisis 

message: There seem to be a few discrepancies throughout the article regarding inclusion of different countries, and the largest cities lists. I know there's ongoing debate about France's inclusion (I for one think that the southern part should be included, certainly, for many reasons, e.g. cultural, geographic, linguistic, etc.). The Occitan areas in particular, and the Riviera/Marseille/Nice definitely should be included; they're even more south than some of the northernmost parts of Italy. But it's not included in the population lists. And the Balkan area is also subject to debate. On a geographic basis, it should be, but culturally it differs a lot from other parts of "Southern Europe", aside from Greece and perhaps to an extent some areas of the Adriatic coast like Dalmatia and Albania. 
And what should be done with Romania? It's generally regarding as being part of "Southeastern Europe" for a variety of reasons, but not often included in "Southern Europe" proper, even if various South Slavic countries sometimes are (and I'll admit it sounds strange to do so). I guess it's kind of on the border-line of it, and occupies a fuzzy place in this whole concept. Including the entire country is too much, but the southern regions, like Wallachia and Dobrogea, may be worth considering. Geographically, it's also somewhat confusing. While often referred to as a "Balkan" country, especially for cultural and ethnic reasons, the peninsula is often defined as the areas south of the Danube. However, drawing a line from the northeast corner of the Adriatic to the northwest corner of the Black Sea to create a true peninsula, in a technical sense, would include the southern part of the country, roughly corresponding to the old Wallachia region, south of the Carpathians. There are also some cultural differences between north and south, with a gradual change. Dobrogea near the Black Sea, however, is considered part of the peninsula even under the strict definition, and the region does have a somewhat more southern-leaning aspect to it, due to its history. 
The country as a whole speaks a Romance language, and has a few aspects of cultural elements more characteristic of southern Europe, such as popularity of wine and a very long history of making it; however, in other ways it has an Eastern European kind of culture as well, including an Orthodox religion, but the same could be said of Balkan Slavic countries (there is also a Catholic minority). It mostly fits into the Balkan cultural sphere overall, in terms of things like cuisine, culture, music, folk traditions/dress, etc, having received some Ottoman influences like its southern neighbors. Transylvania has, due to its history, many Central European elements overall and architectural influences. There is also an ethno-linguistic tie with various minority communities of Vlachs in the southern Balkans as well. Overall there is a unique blend of elements that makes the Balkan region rather distinct. Another problem is Moldova, which is often grouped with Romania due to speaking the same language; however, going that far is too much of a stretch, since the culture there becomes noticeably more typically Eastern European, and it was part of the Soviet Union. Either way, Bucharest, which is fairly close to the southern border of the country near Bulgaria, has a population of around 2 million, which is larger than some of the others listed. Depends on if one wants to include it (technically, it's further south geographically than Belgrade, not to mention Zagreb and Ljubljana). Geopolitical definitions also influence things: France is often grouped into western Europe traditionally, and Romania and Bulgaria into Eastern Europe, especially in the Cold War definition because of the alignment of these states within the Eastern Bloc (as opposed to Tito of Yugoslavia going in a different direction, despite Communism). I'm not really favoring a particular course of action; just thought I'd throw some ideas in. Word dewd544 (talk) 05:35, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I strongly agree on that point : "The Occitan areas in particular, and the Riviera/Marseille/Nice definitely should be included". I can't understand how one may consider the mediterranean coast of France being not southern Europe but may consider northern Italy to be part of this area...That's an evidence, not only geographically, but also culturally and historically... Marseille have much more in common with others mediterraneans cities than with northern french or european cities Matieu Sokolovic (talk) 12:17, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistencies in definitions 

message: Considering that population of the urban area of Belgrade is 1,233,796, and considering that this ranking have been made withe the population of the urban area (not the cities population, not the metropolitan area...) I had removed Belgrad and added Marseille at the 9th position (It seems to me absolutely impossible not to consider Marseille as a southern europe city btw. Matieu Sokolovic (talk) 10:44, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cities 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Southern Europe. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150910072258/http://www.cartileonline.eu/carte/1025738/dragan-brujia-vodia-kroz-svet-vizantijeDragan to http://www.cartileonline.eu/carte/1025738/dragan-brujia-vodia-kroz-svet-vizantijeDragan
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) 08:30, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Canton of Ticino is southern Europe as this link and others clearly show. It is in the Mediterranean basin.Also Rhone and Danube basins  are so.An area is classified geographically by mountais and so its basin. If nobody answers article wil be correctly restored.https://books.google.it/books?id=bRDbbGQP0xgC&pg=PA194&dq=rhone+southern+europe+basin&hl=it&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiB05y1rc7cAhWHyqYKHRWSBVQ4ChDoAQgnMAA#v=onepage&q=rhone%20southern%20europe%20basin&f=falseMaxim3377 (talk) 12:04, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The text you've cited is a book on hydrology, which is not a great source for information about geopolitics. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 14:03, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with . Your claims are WP:ORIGINALRESEARCH. Either you find a reliable source that explicitly states that southern Switzerland is in SE, or you do not add anything. Also some advice, if you start edit-warring so soon after getting blocked, chances are you will get blocked again. And a reminder to be WP:CIVIL: Don't accuse other editors of trolling. Dr. K.
User talk:Dr.K.Some people agree with me about Ticino is southern Europe and it isn't an original research.Now 3 valid references (also in this one Ticino is reported in the Mediterranean basin) and no references to oppose.Don' t thread and don't talk about form.Let's talk about the subject.https://books.google.it/books?id=DLNJCnuznzQC&pg=PA542&dq=canton+ticino++bacino+mediterraneo+geografia&hl=it&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjtttPNu9TcAhVSLVAKHTLWBvsQ6AEIKDAA#v=onepage&q=canton%20ticino%20%20bacino%20mediterraneo%20geografia&f=false See Ticino talkAnd now?Maxim3377 (talk) 22:25, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Southern Switzerland is southern Europe 

message: Is there a good reason for having removed southern France from this article ? How is it possible to think that a city like Marseille and an island like Corsica aren't part of Southern Europe while cities like Turin or Milan would be part of it ? If you put just a part of Turkey (Eastern Thrace !), I cannot understand why you could not put a part of France, at least the regions bordering the mediterranean sea (Corsica, Provence, Languedoc) --Matieu Sokolovic (talk) 08:23, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Southern France is obviously part of Southern and Mediterranean Europe, as all sources indicate. A British francophobe on this Talk page insisted that France below the Loire river should be considered part of Southern Europe, this doesn't match the usual definitions of Southern France though and moreover it'd put Switzerland, Austria, Hungary, etc. within Southern Europe. The correct definition of Southern France as in the corresponding article is the area below Marais Poitevin: roughly below 45.5°. I've updated the map accordingly. Dyadique78 (talk) 17:19, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

text: @Matieu Sokolovic corsica is part of the Italian geographycal area so it is indeed southern Galdur73 (talk) 16:38, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eastern Thrace but not southern France ? 

message: It seems there is some problems with the density indicated for most of the cities. Density of all of them seems to have been calculated with the inner city superficie but with the urban area population, wich result in very high density, not representative of the reality. For example, Athens is presented with an urban area population of 3,484,000 (wich is btw not the same figure in the main article on the city wich indicate 3,090,908 inhabitants for the urban area) and a density of 3600hab/km². The superficie of the Athens urban area is 7,500km², wich would be roughly 450hab/km² with 3,484,000 inhabitants (and 410hab/km² if we use the same figure used in the city main article). The same error is repeated for every city in the classement (included difference between the population indicated here and the population in city main article... There is a difference of 3,000,000 inhabitants for Milan !), except Marseille, which I've added recently. Matieu Sokolovic (talk) 07:37, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Urban areas 

message: Binksternet It is not you who re-invent the definition of southern Europe--81.67.166.149 (talk) 10:37, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Binksternet 

message: TU-nor he erases important parts of the article like others whose reality they don't like. He gives himself the right to censor at will as he has a little power on wikipedia--81.67.166.149 (talk) 08:08, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  VANDALISM OF TU-nor 

message: big problem with some user who intentionally censors the article  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.67.166.149 (talk) 16:59, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  PROBLEM OF CENSUR 

message: Hello everybody. I think it's better to leave both versions.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Batman06400 (talk • contribs) 19:39, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  controversial 

message: I believe if Cyprus is to be included in Southern Europe, Northern Cyprus should also be included or they should be both removed since the two states are both on the same island. Although Northern Cyrpus is a state with limited recognition, that is not a valid reason to exclude Northern Cyprus in my opinion. It may not have the recognition it's southern sibling has but it still exists as a separate political entity therefore it should be included. It is noteworthy enough for such a page if Cyprus is to be included. It's limited recognition can also be briefly mentioned in the notes. The page should merely acknowledge its existence which makes up the 36 percent of the island. I would appreciate any other perspectives on this matter. 176.88.47.54 (talk) 17:57, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The discussion on this subject is here and here. There are three problems, the 176.88.47.54 cannot understand the basic issues. First: on Wikipedia we do not add unrecognized states to articles (like as recognized countries). In accordance with international standards and international law, Northern Cyprus is part of the Republic of Cyprus. I know - they work on a principle of "state in state" however, governance methods are not an indicator. There are many autonomous regions and even republics in the state (for example :Republics of Russia), there are also many self-proclaimed states - they don't matter, the same as Northern Cyprus. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, in other encyclopedias also such standards are used. Second: the issue of inserting Cyprus into the article is controversial (few sources show Cyprus as part of southern Europe, however, this is already Asia on border with Europe), this is the maximum acceptable controversy, let's not extend the problem to an even more debatable problem like Northern Cyprus (self-proclaimed state, not recognized by other countries and UN, they are ordinary separatists). Third: there are no reliable sources showing that Northern Cyprus lies in Southern Europe. To sum up: there is neither need, nor justification, nor sources. 176.88.47.54: stop acting like a child. Maybe it's not fair to you, but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, we rely on official facts and sources. Subtropical-man (✉ | en-2) 12:13, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Northern Cyprus and Cyprus 

message: Dear IP,
I asked you to use talk page, present your claims here. Thank You(KIENGIR (talk) 12:16, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  IP edits 

message: Following up the discussion above, I will suggest to remove the infobox altogether. The reason is simple: There is no real data to put into it. As with the map discussed above, the list of countries is dependent on a clear definition. As the list now stands, it is neither in line with the green map (Southern France, Monaco, Bulgaria) or the blue map (Corsica), or for that matter with the list in the lede sentence (Southern France, Corsica, Monaco, Romania). Lacking a definition of limitations, it does not make any sense to give numbers for area and population. As for languages, the same applies, and the current list is neither consistent with the green map (French and Bulgarian missing), nor with the list of countries (French in Corsica missing). Infoboxes have regularly been attempted introduced to other "X-ern Europe" articles, but they have always been rejected and removed. This one should go, too! --T*U (talk) 09:33, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. The geographical divisions of Europe are fluid concepts, so the infobox lacks a sharply defined base for hard facts. The various concepts of "Southern Europe" – each of which should be well sourced – are better captured in prose and a few representative maps. –Austronesier (talk) 11:14, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be better to delete the map more than the infobox. Because the countries mentioned in the infobox nobody disputes them. Removing the problem is better than removing all the information.--81.67.153.44 (talk) 16:19, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: . False! --T*U (talk) 16:46, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: @T*U. Is that so ?? Which countries are you having a problem with ? A country of the infobox of course.--81.67.153.44 (talk) 18:49, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

text: A wise decision, full support from me. There is a map of Europe, and everyone knows that south is at the bottom of a conventional map. The remaining details can be in the prose. There never will be the definition of Southern Europe. Different criteria will lead to different divisions into subregions, culinary Southern Europe is not meteorological Southern Europe. As for all those organizations: bureaucrats will continue to arbitrarily split & merge subregions (which correspond to internal administrative departments in those organizations) driven by funding and the result of the lastest McKinsey spree. –Austronesier (talk) 10:53, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:05, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: Further to the arguments above about the infobox, we should take a look at other parts of the article. The section "Population" with the subsection "Largest urban areas" are ridden with exactly the same problem as the infobox: The selection of countries is dependent on a clear definition and/or inclusion criteria, which we do not have. Unless we can agree on such criteria, the list is WP:OR. Regarding the cities/urban areas, the problem is even larger, since we also would need to agree on what kind of definition we should follow for the cities: city proper?, municipality?, built-up area?, metropolitan area?. We would need to take the numbers from sources that followed the same criteria for counting the population, if we had agreed on the geographical criteria in the first place.
I am removing the section and subsection. If anyone wants to recreate such section, feel free to present an outline of the section with inclusion criteria here in the talk page before reentering. --T*U (talk) 14:17, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: This is why you should not gradually delete information and end up creating disinformation. These deletions do not have to be and concern southern Europe. You can however modify them.--Julio188red (talk) 08:49, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say simply create the section with largest urban areas (ok, excluding Romania and Moldova as they show up only on one map if I am correct). Add ″UN geoscheme class. used for statistical convenience″ or something like that. Different definitions of the region are nicely given in either way, so people can choose which city to include in what they see as Southern Europe. Like choosing bread or bottle of wine.  True, no clear definitions are given but let us not make it too difficult for ourselves because of that. If UN can create a map for ″statistical convenience″, then we can use it for similarly noble reason! — Boleynn (talk) 01:53, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Next step 

message: According to Encyclopedia Britannica, Romania is listed under the Balkans article as a Balkan state. Would it be incorrect to place Romania within the parentheses following the words “Balkan Peninsula”? Moreover, in the introductory paragraph of this Southern Europe page, Romania isn’t listed at all, yet it is listed in the subdivisions section. Epitome of Creativity (talk) 23:32, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Southeast Europe and the Balkans aren't the exact same thing. Southeast Europe generally includes the Balkans and its surrounding areas. For example, DK's Reference World Atlas also includes Romania, Moldova, Vojvodina (Serbia), and Cyprus in Southeast Europe. Southeast Europe is sometimes considered a subregion of Southern Europe, therefore, there is nothing wrong to include Romania as a part of Southern Europe. Vic Park (talk) 06:20, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Status of Romania 

message: Thank you for your edits to this article. They certainly constitute clear improvements. I have, however, some difficulties with the expression  in the second sentence. As far as I can see, that claim is not really sourced, and I am uncertain if it even is possible to source it. It would need a source that not only listed states, but that also evaluated various definitions and listings that exist. Given only the different definitions mentioned in the article, it is doubtful that the claim is even true. As an example, none of the maps presented in the 'Other classifications' section include Bulgaria, far less Romania. So are they really "generally included"? Before your edits, the text said , which is a possible solution. Another possibility would be to add . Thoughts? --T*U (talk) 16:29, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your comment. These countries have been included as part of Southern Europe (including South-eastern Europe and South-western Europe) in the regions of Europe article, which gathered several different definitions from multiple sources. I agree with your suggestion though, I reckon "some or all of" is a more WP:NPOV way of compiling a list of all possible Southern European countries. I will go and change the wording. Vic Park (talk) 16:17, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "generally includes"