Talk:European Union/Archive 4

message: What's an associate member?  The article says that Turkey is one, but makes no other mention of this term.  Information on what an associate member is, and a list of current associate members, would be appreciated. -Smack 23:38 7 Jul 2003 (UTC)
----
There's a page somewhere which lists them, but it isn't too detailed. They are mostly European nations who wish to apply in the near future, and also non-European members who want to join, but obviously cannot, so this is as close as they can get. 
Also, regarding the marriage story above, the UK and Ireland are exempt from many such laws as they are outside the Schengen Area Grunners 03:37, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Associate Member

message: Pre-May 2004 posts on this topic archived here. Zoney 00:17, 30 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Good grief, I certainly hope it's not the definition for a country; not only does it make an outrageous emphasis on brutal force, but it would also mean that countries like Island, or the Swiss Confederation before the Sonderbund war, don't exist. Countries are defined by a set of powers, notably legal power, the right to produce currency, political law-making, ... among which force is a very minor and optional one. Rama 07:32, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Country?

message: I have doubts about the sense of that list. I would propose that only those countries who have already - at least - applied for membership should be mentioned there (i. e. Turkey, Croatia, Macedonia). (I know Switzerland has applied, too, but this application is frozen, as it is stated correctly in the article.) Otherwise one would have to list all European countries because all are 'possible post-2007 members'. Especially Moldova seems to be odd in the list because Ukraine is not listed, for example. (I know Switzerland has applied, too, but this application is frozen, as it is corrected stated in the article.) --EBB 10:59, 7 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible post-2007 enlargement 

message: The section Legal history and governing treaties, along with the section about the three pillars has been removed to European Union Law (not by me). It is fair to say that there is some need for the main European Union page to be more streamlined and generalised - with the specifics on seperate pages. In this case, a much smaller section is needed to replace the missing bit. It should cover the most important points and give an overview to the treaties and 3 pillars.
European Union Law is also messy now, the aforementioned sections should perhaps go to their own page, or European Union treaties (does it exist?).
Finally, I would say that the missing history section is a similar case - a summary is required from the seperate History of the European Union page.
Considering the time I put into the treaties section, I will get around to doing this eventually - but I would absolutely love if someone else could put some work into it! I would say to the user who removed the section - you've created a heck of a lot of work - hope you realise this! :o)
In conclusion - there's also other loose ends in the article - the role of the community in the Union is once again obscure in its seperation from the main bit on the 3 pillars. Also some other areas are now discussed in a greater level of detail - they may need looked at. Thinking intergovernmentalism vs supranationalism particularly - it's not as sensible without the previous sections - and is obviously longer despite its being a less weighty subtopic!
ARGHHHHH - help please!!!!! Let's get this article back on track!
Zoney 11:13, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section removal 

message: I produced this new map by editing the Europe map and the existing EU map (for the further east bit). I hope that this is clearer - the paler background on the EU countries is done to show up the text more. Unfortunately this is slightly at the expense of a clear difference between Romania/Bulgaria and Turkey, but it's distinguishable. I added the names of the EU neighbours. Yes the font is VERY small, but as they're not as relevant to the topic, it's no matter. They are recognisable. (I don't relish the prospect of trying to fit all those Balkan countries in the EU countries font!!!)
Please let me know your opinions. Unlike the old map, I have one on my PC at 300% of the size, with no anti-aliasing, which makes changing things easier.
I hope those who have put such effort into the old map are not annoyed. I did spend about 2.5 hours myself doing this new version!!!
Zoney 00:30, 21 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't be ridiculous, anonymous, ofcourse the UK is part of the EU. Aris Katsaris 13:16, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  We all (the other EU countries) wish it wasnt, but unfortunately it is :) You could also say the UK is part of USA as it does everything USA tells it to.. --HJV 22:45, 13 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Major new map version

message: This talk page was HUMONGOUS (or however one is supposed to spell that!) – so I archived everything back to 3 weeks ago. Everything from about the 10th May should still be here. One or two topics above have been discussed some time ago, but with recent comments. I've archived the old comments too (in the cases above, the headings are enough context for the comments). I hope no-one has any problems! (man it took longer than I thought!) Zoney 01:18, 30 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Archiving

message: In Mozilla Firefox (0.8) the table with all of the information about the EU does not display correctly. It overlaps the text, and moves the text over to the left- doesn't let it spread out through the page. It works fine in IE and Safari, though.
:I've the same problem with Firefox in XP and 2K. It seems to be a site-wide problem (I've had it on some other pages, also thumbnail images doing the same, floating centre rather than right) though indeed page-specific in some way (goodness knows what!) see Republic of Ireland for a similar table that works fine! I would suggest reporting it to m:MediaWiki 1.3 comments and bug reports as is suggested on the Wikipedia:Village pump page. I've already done so actually, but perhaps you want to add to my report there.
:Zoney 22:02, 31 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  EU Overview Table 

message: Currently, on the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries, they're discussing removal of footers, such as EU membership boxes, as they are thought to be aesthetically unpleasing. They'd be replaced by Category:EU countries at the top of the Country page.
What do people think?? -- EuroTom 16:42, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: There is already an EU countries and candidates footer, the above footer is just for current member states - Zoney 09:03, 8 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of EU Membership boxes

message: Anyone know how to alias international organisations to the international organizations category? The page is quite appropriately written in British / International English. But this category heading at the bottom is a problematic Americanism that introduces inconsistencies. See also Category talk:International organizations. Zoney 09:14, 8 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  US category spelling 

message: From the section "Member states and successive enlargements":
"In 1952/1958 the six founding members were..."
Can someone explain the significance of these dates? They aren't referenced anywhere else in the article.
--Wasabe3543 08:48, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  significance of 1952/1958?