Misplaced Pages

Talk:List of sovereign states: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 12:41, 7 February 2022 editDimadick (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers805,315 edits Requested move 7 February 2022← Previous edit Revision as of 16:19, 7 February 2022 edit undoEst. 2021 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers13,502 edits Requested move 7 February 2022Next edit →
Line 215: Line 215:
* '''Oppose'''. ''Sovereign state'' is much more ] than ''country'' or ''nation'' which can be ]. --] (]) 09:38, 7 February 2022 (UTC) * '''Oppose'''. ''Sovereign state'' is much more ] than ''country'' or ''nation'' which can be ]. --] (]) 09:38, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
* '''Oppose''' Countries are not necessarily sovereign. ] (]) 12:41, 7 February 2022 (UTC) * '''Oppose''' Countries are not necessarily sovereign. ] (]) 12:41, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
* {{to|Dimadick}} That's what I said.<br>{{ping|Chipmunkdavis|Heanor|Selfstudier}} IMHO, 'Sovereign states' should be a section of ''List of countries''. There's no point in creating a duplicate for such a small difference; we could better work on a single ''List of countries'' with two sections (Sovereign, Non-Sovereign). ] (] <b>·</b> ]) 16:18, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:19, 7 February 2022

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of sovereign states article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16Auto-archiving period: 30 days 
Former featured listList of sovereign states is a former featured list. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page and why it was removed. If it has improved again to featured list standard, you may renominate the article to become a featured list.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 22, 2006Featured list candidatePromoted
November 29, 2008Featured list removal candidateDemoted
March 3, 2009Featured list candidateNot promoted
July 16, 2011Articles for deletionKept
March 12, 2012Featured list candidateNot promoted
Current status: Former featured list
Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. Parts of this article relate to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing the parts of the page related to the contentious topic:

  • You must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
  • You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this topic

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

If it is unclear which parts of the page are related to this contentious topic, the content in question should be marked within the wiki text by an invisible comment. If no comment is present, please ask an administrator for assistance. If in doubt it is better to assume that the content is covered.

Further information
The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are:
  1. Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive.
  2. Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.

With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:

  • Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring.
  • Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.

After being warned, contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topic sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.
Editors may report violations of these restrictions to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. When in doubt, don't revert!
This list has a detailed criteria for inclusion. Please do not add new entries without prior discussion. Items that do not fit the set criteria, such as Antarctica, the Sovereign Military Order of Malta and polities normally classified as dependent territories, micronations, supranational unions or constituent political divisions will be removed.
This list has a detailed criteria for organization. Please do not change the categorizations in the table without prior discussion. Changes to the organization of the list of states that go against consensus will be reverted. For more details on the organization criteria, please review the discussion of criteria.
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconCountries
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of countries on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CountriesWikipedia:WikiProject CountriesTemplate:WikiProject Countriescountry
WikiProject Countries to-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
WikiProject iconLists High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Misplaced Pages. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconPolitics High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconInternational relations High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Template:WP1.0

Archiving icon
Archives


  1. Nov 2001 – Apr 2005
  2. Apr 2005 – Feb 2006
  3. Feb 2006 – Nov 2006
  4. Jan 2007 – Jun 2007
  5. Jul 2007 – Apr 2009
  6. Apr 2009 – Apr 2010
  7. Apr 2010 – Jul 2010
  8. Jul 2010 – Feb 2011
  9. Feb 2011 – Jul 2011
  10. Aug 2011 – Jun 2012
  11. Jun 2012 – Nov 2013
  12. Nov 2013 – Jul 2014
  13. Jul 2014 – Dec 2016
  14. Dec 2016 – Jan 2019
  15. Feb 2019 – current


This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.


The Afghanistan problem

I suggest this solution to our Afghanistan problem:

  • The short name, formal name and flag are those given our article Afghanistan. Consensus there is to use the name and flag of the current ruling authority, i.e. the Taliban.
  • We add a new text explaining the situation in the Further information column.
  • We change the footnote at the top of the column to include Any alternative governments recognised by at least one state (irrespective of whether they have a government in exile).

I have some comments to make.

I actually think it is probably a violation of WP:WEIGHT for us to accept the Taliban flag and nomenclature for Afghanistan, given that they are not recognised as legitimate internationally. However, the issues at stake are exactly the same as at Afghanistan, and I see no value in rediscussing the point at every article independently.

I would note that the argument that the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan is still the UN member is irrelevant to the choice of name and flag because this is not Member states of the United Nations.

It seems to me that the presence or absence of a government in exile is not the relevant point, it is whether an alternative government is recognised. In this case, it is not obvious that the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan still exists even as a government-in-exile. But, whether it exists or not, it is recognised by countries throughout the world and is represented at the UN, so it needs to be mentioned.

I will WP:BOLDly implement this suggestion in the article, but I have no doubt that people will continue to change it. I think changes need to be discussed here, rather than just with drive-by edits. I note that it is not immediately obvious what the current standing consensus is, since the article has not really been stable since the Fall of Kabul. But I suspect that it still refers to the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. Kahastok talk 11:21, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

I would say there is not a strong consensus to use the flag at Afghanistan, it has taken its place through sheer force of edits, but this is probably not worth rediscussing as noted. I previously proposed at the template data that a default question mark flag be used, which may work here. Do we have sources on the alternative government being recently recognised as the government? My understanding is that even Panjshir, for that brief period, gave no official position on the old government. CMD (talk) 14:41, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
On the latter point, I must admit, it's my assumption based on my understanding that they haven't done anything at all other than refuse to recognise the new government. That, and the old flag still flies over the embassies. But when I tried briefly to find a source it was not forthcoming. I'm open to changing the wording if we can't prove the claim I put in, but I do think we need to put something there. Kahastok talk 15:08, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
Is this the latest UNSC res? "Noting that the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan is not recognized at the United Nations, and furthermore that the UN Security Council does not support the restoration of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan"? Selfstudier (talk) 15:30, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
Thinking over your first point, if the current flag at Afghanistan is dropped then I think it depends on why. If it's because we don't know what the Taliban flag looks like (and I don't know how definitive the sourcing for it is), then yes, the question mark flag is appropriate. If it's because of WP:WEIGHT concerns such as I expressed above, then I think  Afghanistan is better because in that case we're saying we don't think it's neutral to give a flag. Kahastok talk 16:07, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

User:Svito3. If you revert per WP:BRD then you need to join the discussion. If you are not prepared to discuss your objection, then don't revert.

The claim in this edit summary, "we specificially list states as recognized by UN: note is sufficent" is factually wrong.

First, the UN does not recognise states at all. It recognises governments of states that have been accepted for membership.

Second, no part of our inclusion criteria or other descriptions of this list requires that we use the flag and name preferred by the current UN delegation. There are several instances where we differ from the UN in this area. And that's before we start discussing the 13 entities listed here that are not UN member states, and 11 that are also not UN observer states.

If you're looking for the list of UN member states, you can find it at member states of the United Nations.

Because of this, using the old flag and name with a footnote, The United Nations currently recognizes the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan as the government of Afghanistan instead of the de facto ruling government is unacceptable to me. The fact that the UN recognises the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan does not explain why we would list it here, when even our own article Afghanistan uses the Taliban name and flag. Kahastok talk 16:07, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

This is your own interpretation of WP:BRD and you just started an edit war. -- Svito3 (talk) 18:13, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
The name of the UN member state is Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. It isn't clear whether the Taliban wants to rename the state *officially*, but if it does, it needs to (i) gain recognition as the legitimate government of Afdhanistan and (ii) gain acceptance of its preferred name for the country. Until such things tke place, we should not change the country's name in the article. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 03:12, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
I mostly agree with AuH20Republican here, the UNSC resolution I posted above goes out of its way to refer to the "Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan" but avoids this usage when speaking of the Emirate or instead refers to the Taliban, it is not clear whether they mean a government or a state or they mean to refer to both as unwelcome (the wording suggests the latter). The country name is an ISO thing and won't happen if the UNSC opposes it.Selfstudier (talk) 10:13, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
OK, so, my questions here are:
  • What particular circumstances on this list justify our not simply adopting the usage on the article Afghanistan?
  • In particular, you argue that the country name listed here "is an ISO thing" and imply that we should feel bound by the UN's decisions. On what basis do you argue this?
When answering, I ask that you consider that this is explicitly not a list of member states of the United Nations, nor a copy of ISO 3166-1. Because of this, there are already states listed here under names that are different from those found on ISO 3166-1. There are also states listed here that are not found on any ISO list at all. Kahastok talk 10:51, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
Well, we have discussed this before in other contexts, I don't really think that WP editors should be making up rules in this area, I realize there is a long standing consensus about which states to include but the weakness has been shown with the current case (and Myanmar as well?).Selfstudier (talk) 10:58, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
The weakness here is expected from reflecting real-world difficulty in a simple list, especially when dealing with a dynamic situation that external sources do not have a clear line on. That would be challenging in any rules framework. It is not exactly the situation that the IRA is itself a UN member, the nebulous entity of Afghanistan is the UN member, and names and governments often change without affecting membership, although the UN can choose representatives. I think this discussion should separate the issue of the note in the extent, and the flag/name. The government note is currently done for Syria, and seems reasonable if only to reduce continued drive-bys. The flag/name is trickier, as these are specifically representative symbols, and so the situation hinges on how to interpret what representation means. (This is not something Talk:Afghanistan has grappled with in any real capacity.) CMD (talk) 11:52, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
If it occurs, to take one possible outcome, that Iran were to recognize the Emirate, then we would have to include it in this list, am I right? Selfstudier (talk) 12:38, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
If Iran recognised it as a separate new state to the existing state of Afghanistan, then that meets our criteria. However, this seems unlikely. CMD (talk) 13:49, 20 September 2021 (UTC)


I don't see why our limitation in being a simple list is substantially different to Afghanistan's limitation in having a simple infobox. They have just one flag and just one name, and so do we. If they didn't grapple with it in the (remarkably short) RFC that they had at Talk:Afghanistan, perhaps we should push them to reconsider the question through a new RFC (advertised on WP:CENT, that runs at least a week). I have not yet seen any good reason to deviate from the principle that we should follow their consensus, whatever it is.
Other options that they (and therefore we) could adopt might be no flag or full name, or both flags and full names. I believe we did something like this for Syria earlier in the war, and something like the following table could be possible.
Sample table collapsed for brevity Kahastok talk 16:20, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
Common and formal names Membership within the UN System Sovereignty dispute Further information on status and recognition of sovereignty
 Afghanistan –

 Islamic Republic of Afghanistan
 Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan

A UN member state A None Insert text here

Where obviously "insert text here" is replaced with an appropriate and sourced description for the situation, and the header footnotes are not removed.

Kahastok talk 16:20, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
The RfC was remarkably short because it was closed by the person who opened it, but you're right the simplicity is a real issue in both cases. I would prefer no flag and no long name to a doubling, although I won't strongly object if others feel otherwise. CMD (talk) 01:22, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Gonna be WP:BOLD and acknowledge the status of the IEA in the notes column; i think this is the best option as the IRA is still recognized by the UN and the table does mention UN member states, but it is critical for accuracy's sake that the IEA is acknowledged. WittyWidi (talk) 21:20, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Israel text.

This edit altered long standing text "Israel exerts strong control over the territory" to "Israel controls to some degree.." I amended the dilution to "Israel occupies..", which is actually the clearest explanation of the degree of control. This has been reverted here with edit summary "not everyone agrees that Gaza is occupied (rather than put under siege/blockade)" but the lead for Gaza states "Despite the 2005 Israeli disengagement from Gaza, the United Nations, international human rights organisations, and the majority of governments and legal commentators consider the territory to be still occupied by Israel" so this reason for reverting is incorrect.Selfstudier (talk) 09:40, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

First of all, "Israel exerts strong control over the territory" is the stable version so any change requires a consensus. I didn't notice the previous change and I'm fine with this wording as well. While it may not be apparent from the Gaza article lede, there is a disagreement on whether the Gaza strip is occupied or not, considering that there are no Israeli forces occupying and and that Israel doesn't control all of its borders. The existing note explains these varying degrees of control. Alaexis¿question? 11:32, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
Since this matter has come up, I dispute the characterization as it currently appears. The fact that the IMoFA (guilty always dispute their guilt), Dore Gold and some other POV sources (overcited) indicates disagreement, that is not in fact the case, "considered by some" is nonsense, it is generally agreed that Gaza is "occupied" precisely because of the degree of control exercised.Selfstudier (talk) 13:01, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
The Gaza Strip lede you referenced cites a couple of scholarly articles which argue that Gaza is still occupied. Of course it's just as easy to find articles which argue the opposite. Encyclopedia Britannica has the section on occupation followed by the section on Hamas rule. The degree of control exercised by Israel is different in East Jerusalem, West Bank and Gaza is different and the note explains it so that no reader would be misled. Replacing the long-standing neutral wording with "occupies" is not NPOV. Alaexis¿question? 19:22, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

UN-controlled article?

Unless we're declaring that the UN is the sole decider of the content of this article? The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan is a fact, where's the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan no longer exists. We should be reflecting what is, not what the UN wants. GoodDay (talk) 21:27, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

I sometimes wish that it was the case that the UN be sole decider, life would be so much simpler. As it stands though, the criteria are clearly NOT based on the UN deciding who's in and who is out. In fact, if a single UN state were to recognize the Emirate, it would be in as I understand it but we are still waiting on such an event.Selfstudier (talk) 21:33, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
As discussed above, I feel we should be doing whatever the article at Afghanistan does. It makes little sense to me that we should take a different view, since there is no particular circumstance that applies here that does not also apply there.
This argument is rather undermined by the fact that the status quo there is based on a consensus at Talk:Afghanistan that is on pretty dodgy ground. That consensus is based on an RFC that was closed by the person who opened it after less than two days.
There is a current RFC at Talk:Afghanistan, and I would invite interested editors here to contribute to it. However, that too is limited narrowly to the flag in the infobox, explicitly excluding the name, which would still be listed based on the flawed RFC. So I don't actually think that resolves the problem. Kahastok talk 21:48, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
I agree with GoodDay. Misplaced Pages's content is based on reliable sources, not the desires of the UN, which is a political body. RS state that Taiwan is sovereign and the government of Afghanistan is the Islamic Emirate. There is no reason why our list of sovereign states shouldn't reflect that. ― Tartan357  05:39, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
But that perspective is not accepted by any other government on the entire planet. And based on WP:WEIGHT, there's at least a reasonable argument that says that that POV is significant and needs to be taken into account. Kahastok talk 20:07, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
The Taliban are in control of Afghanistan, now. It's simply a fact. GoodDay (talk) 23:18, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
U.N. Seats Denied, for Now, to Afghanistan’s Taliban and Myanmar’s Junta De facto and de jure are different though.Selfstudier (talk) 00:07, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

maybe add a rederict listing for "Western Sahara" that leads the reader to the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic?

it's the more common name for the region/nation/whatever you call it — Preceding unsigned comment added by H. Iristine (talkcontribs) 00:42, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done --Somerby (talk) 06:21, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Is Taiwan still an observer in one UN specialized agency?

It is written that Taiwan is an observer in World Health Organization under the name "Chinese Taipei". But in reality the government of Taiwan was only allowed to participate as an observer from 2009 to 2016, but has not been invited again since: Timsit, Anabel; Hui, Mary (16 May 2020). "Taiwan's status could disrupt the most important global health meeting of this pandemic". Quartz. Archived from the original on 6 June 2020. Retrieved 6 June 2020.. Thus if there is no objection I will remove this claim from the article. --Somerby (talk) 22:26, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 7 February 2022

It has been proposed in this section that List of sovereign states be renamed and moved to List of countries.

A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.


Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly. Links: current logtarget logdirect move

List of sovereign statesList of countries – The definitions of country, nation and state are often controversial, somehow arbitrary, but not all countries are sovereign states (and viceversa). The current naming convention is countries (e.g. Lists of countries, Category:Lists of countries, Lists of countries and territories), which I consider to be more appropriate. Therefore, in accordance with the applicable policies and guidelines, especially our article titling policy and the guideline on disambiguation and primary topics, I propose to rename this page List of countries, which is currently a redirect. Thanks in advance, Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 08:25, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

  • Oppose. Around a decade ago we had a number of moves towards titles including "state". This was due to continuing disruption regarding the additions of England, Scotland, and sometimes Wales and Northern Ireland to such lists. The phrasing "not all countries are sovereign states" in the opener above is a reminder of that disruption, and specifically confusing with regards to this RM as it seems to imply a goal of having more entries in this list than we currently do. CMD (talk) 08:47, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
Categories: