Talk:Council of Europe - Knowledge (XXG)

3255:, please discuss here regarding recent edits before continuing to make changes. You recently restored a version of the infobox which included the geographic regions of "Anatolia" and "Siberia", within the location section (in addition to placing Georgia and Azerbaijan entirely within Asia, when they both have territory in Europe as well). In line with the other examples, it is far better to use the precise country or administrative subunit (ie. Greenland, French Polynesia), rather then including vague geographic regions within a country. For example, when you added the Canary Islands, you decided to add the precise territorial entity within Spain, rather then the geographical region (Macaronesia) where it is located. For this case, I think we should be as consistent as possible. As for Europe/Eurasia, yes, Europe is technically the Westernmost part of Eurasia but as I mentioned above, I don't believe it is utmost necessary to point out minute technicalities. The infobox isn't meant to go into great depth of each member states' geographic details/perplexities, otherwise, the list would be endless if it did. Like I said above, there is already an article which covers all members of the CoE, should readers require additional geographic information, the individual country articles are far more detailed- and rightfully so. 2592:. At that article, the lead describes it as an "Ecclesiastical" state or a "Sacerdotal-Monarchical" state. In the infobox, the term "elective theocracy" is given as the final descriptor, but note the modifier. Secondly and more importantly, is there any evidence or source to support the idea that Vatican City has been excluded from the CoE due to a lack of democratic structures? One wonders how democratic a nation must be when Russia, Armenia, Liechtenstein and Azerbaijan (currently holding the presidency) are all members. I generally don't insist on everything being referenced when the assertion seems likely to be true, but this is not the case here. I doubt the CoE would actually object to Vatican City's constitutional structure. I also suspect that due to the unique nature of Vatican City, it has little need to participate in many international organisations, and relatively few resources to do so. Given these common-sense considerations, I think it's abundantly necessary that this statement be supported by a reference. 1866:

divergence between the self-defined official name (R.o.C.) and the common English name (Taiwan), so the compromise has been to use them both. Whether that's the best solution for that part of the problem is immaterial here, because the Macedonia case doesn't have such a problem: "Macedonia" is both common English and self-defining/official. What is comparable and relevant to the present case is the treatment of the third name, the one chosen in the international organisation in question: "Chinese Taipei" logically corresponds to "former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia". The parallel is that this domain-specific external appellation gets mentioned, but not used in our own voice.

1916:

standardized towards "Macedonia"; "FYROM" and "Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" are broadly used, and the instances of using "Macedonia" or "RoM" alone is not the majority. And this is something I realized doing my research when adding references to the "Macedonia (terminology)" article. So, even per your MOSMAC 3 the uniform use of "Macedonia" or "RoM", the solution you want to impose here rejecting any other view on the issue, is not the most appropriate. By restricting the "Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" in a mere footnote I am afraid you are pushing a POV solution.--

1413:

have it as TfYROM, but only if we agree that CoE designations should be used in the table, someone justifies the really long country name, and someone finds something more official than two lists which contradict each other. Nobody's got it right either ("the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia", including quotes). Compromises like "shorten it to FYROM" may be politically correct, but are wrong (it's not the CoE designation and probably insults Macedonians), and there is no "change it to whatever-name to stop edit wars" policy (e.g.

2720:"flag" and "logo" are two different things - they are both official CoE symbols but serve a different purpose. Although the presence of the flag may cause some to confuse CoE with the EU, the reality is that we cannot purge official CoE symbols from Knowledge (XXG) just because it confuses you. The issue with the shared nature of said symbols is more than adequately explained in the very first paragraph and also has its own dedicated section further down the article. I think we can expect our readers to actually, um, read?!-- 3276:, I see your point regarding locations listed. However I think it’s still not necessary to keep both “Europe” and “Eurasia” at the same time. Because the definition of “Eurasia” encompasses whole “Europe” already. The word “Europe” sometimes covers the countries listed under “Eurasia” as well although it happens mostly because of the political reasons. For example; CoE itself classifies Cyprus, countries in the Caucasus, Russia and Turkey as European countries apart from members’ dependencies/regions in other continents. 229: 2453:, where Kosovo is not mentioned. When/if Kosovo applies for some status at CoE (member/observer) it will be mentioned in the members/applicants/observers section, when/if Kosovo is invited to sign/accede to some convention/protocol/other instrument - then it will be mentioned in the co-operations section. In the meantime - we could add a new section "European non-member states", but this is already covered somehow by the "Council of Europe now includes all European states except ..." in the history section. 219: 198: 3284:

transcontinental countries straddling both Europe and Asia. (I think it’s fine to go with “Siberia” and “Anatolia”. These must be not mixed with the Macaronesia archipelagos as some of them (the northern arch., the Azores etc.) are classified as Europe apart from the rest and these archipelagos are territories of different sovereign states unlike the Siberia (Russia) and Anatolia (Turkey). So it’d have not been appropriate writing Macaronesia as not all states there are members of the CoE.)

60: 2527:. For the other comments on the US government, well, I do not believe WP is for the promulgation of these personal comments. In fact, it seems to me the tags at the top are vastly overrated. I think it is a good article. Unfortunately these tags get on there and seem to stay on for year after year. I don't have time to spend on this article but I think you should be aware the tags may not be a sincere evaluation. Thanks.Branigan 15:26, 1 May 2014 (UTC) 729: 587: 566: 3581:

suspended its membership. Whether they are "legally a member in the books" is irrelevant. From Russia's perspective, they are not cooperating with this body any longer and have ceased dialogue with CoE organs. The formal relationship is null and void as per Russian governmental statements. The map you keep reinstating in the infobox is highly deceptive and no longer appropriate considering the recent developments. Regards,

597: 498: 477: 388: 1110: 1093: 675: 114: 93: 124: 51: 21: 320: 299: 1628:

worse by having the flag first and much larger than the logo, which was specifically designed and adopted to counteract the confusion. All I would like is for the presentation to be as unambiguous as possible, especially since the infobox is the first thing readers look at. Can the placement and the size of the flag be changed?

2347:

there are over 270 thousand people in Strasbourg. Even if they cut half the CoE workforce that is a little over a thousand people - yes there are families but I don't even think the impact of such a loss would be "notable", especially given the job losses across the whole of Europe from the recession.-

3744:

Thank you for not reinstating the misleading map with Russia. I do not have experience with maps. However, the map in its current form is more than sufficient for the time being as it is more accurate based on the data currently available. An editor with more experience may improve its quality in due

2204:

I have to confess that until today I did not realise that the Council of Europe was a separate organisation from the EU and that previously, when I have heard it mentioned in relation to some decision or pronouncement, I had believed that the item was EU business. I suspect that there are many people

2057:

that the CoE uses "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" as a provisional reference - and even the "The" nonsense, to explain the alphabetical order; but we should call the country Macedonia; no sane reader will suppose that the Greek region is one of the "47 member states". If it were necessary

1663:

Such a reductive view of Knowledge (XXG) readers was certainly not the motivation. The general observation still stands, however, the current arrangement taints the overall quality of the article. Well short of changing standards of the template all over Knowledge (XXG), it should be possible to find

1557:

Indeed! As the font size was calculated at less than 9pt on Mac, 'greeking' was used. The requirement is thus to adjust it to 9pt or higher. The 'legend' style is set wiki-wide to 90%. A previous editor had tried to allow for this by wrapping the legend in a div with font-size 110%. However, 114%

1398:

and that is all semi formal. Elektron is quite right in that it is hardly unique and people are hardly going to think Greek Macedonia is a CoE member. However as it is the name used by the CoE I think we ought to stick to FYROM - less chance of people changing it all the time. Its annoying and I just

887:

I still fail to see how "F.Y.R.O. Macedonia" fails to meet your standards, while the expanded acronym does -- the difference seems negligible to me. You can impose the conflict in the name to a point, but if you overstate it, you're not doing the readers a favor. Note also that the RoM link is a pipe

4022:

Turkey, alongside Greece, attended meetings of the Committee of Ministers and the Assembly from August 1949, but their instruments of accession weren't deposited with the Secretary General in Strasbourg until April 1950. I agree, the article in its current form is confusing and needs this explaining

3688:

The source confirms Russia's current position (ie. not a member of the CoE). On the contrary, you verbatim proclaimed, "Russia will be a member until 2023." Since there is not a single source confirming that, the status quo should remain until further information becomes available. To reiterate, I'm

3126:

It has just been reversed, presumably because the financial contribution from Russia might have, over time, caused a shrinking of that organisation. Now the Ukrainians have moved out. I was most surprised that the Council gave NGOs a legal status. NGOs are not democratically elected bodies. They are

2607:

The single most important instrument of the Council of Europe is the European Convention on Human Rights. Can you imagine, what would it lead to if the Vatican clergy could sue the Vatican? It is actually the main reason why there are now debates to exit the Convention and Council both in the UK and

2346:

And on the note in the article that it will hurt Strasbourg as 2,321 people are employed by the CoE. Well not all the 2,321 people will be laid off, most of th einflux of money comes from the PA members and other people who are not salaried but bring in money to restaurants and hotels. And of course

1694:

How does factual accuracy taint the quality of the article?? Sorry, but if it is confusing then perhaps it is the Council of Europe's fault for inviting the EU to adopt it and sticking with the same flag. Any confusion with the EU is merely a reflection of the reality and it is not Knowledge (XXG)'s

1650:

The idea is people read the article. We shouldn't change a standard used throughout wikipedia being people can't be arsed to read the first line of the article - or indeed the title. By changing the infobox standard it would only create confusion rather than get rid of it - standards are there for a

1259:

Following the points above (concerns about editors involved with the organization) and lack of clarity about what the CoE actually does, I have added a section highlighting criticism, after achievements. These criticisms suggest that the Council of Europe at this point does too little. For NPOV, the

4113:

Noticed that the paragraph on the Secretary General's role cites the name of a previous SG : "The Secretary General, who is elected for a term of five years by the PACE and heads the Secretariat of the Council of Europe. Thorbjørn Jagland, the former Prime Minister of Norway, was elected Secretary

3507:

be a full member until 2023 is bold and highly speculative. Most sources confirm (even if vague), that Russia has officially suspended any connection with the CoE. From Russia's point of view, it is not a member. Russia is definitely not engaging with any CoE organs right now- yet alone until 2023.

3300:

Ip user- as I've explained, it is not necessary to list every single minute geographical anomaly within the respective infobox. Once again, the CoE article is not the place for that. If it were, we could point out several other geographical related discrepancies among the 47 member states. There is

2508:

I doubt if the founders of the United States of America thought they would ever have a Black president and nuclear weapons, not to mention gay marriage and the Iraq War. It is in the nature of history that things turn out differently. Churchill's participation and speeches (e.g. in Strasbourg) make

2306:

This should be a relatively big story but it isn't yet, presumably because no action has been taken yet and the outlining of what will be cut where is still not very clear; however it seems that the CoE will shrink no matter how. Apart from L'Alsace, the only other newspaper having reported on that

2086:

It seems there are two maps showing the member states according to when they joined. The map at the top of the page shows Norway and Sweden in light green, which according to the key means they joined subsequently. However, the text and another map further down the page imply that they were amongst

1951:

You tend to forget that you are also pushing for a formula of yourself where any "former Yugoslav R|epublic of Macedonia" is pushed into the "vestiary", and only the "Macedonia" is "visible"! This is not acceptable as well! I did not say a clear majority. I said that a simple google booking reveals

1210:

I agree. And I don't think your question is naive so much as indicative of the confusing state of affairs in Europe. Seems to me that if they really want to propagate the Union and establish a united entity, they need to rid themselves of some of these competing institutions. Or maybe that's in the

1199:

Maybe this is a naive question, but I would expect to come away from the article understanding something about what the Council of Europe actually does - and I don't. Perhaps a summary of its various activities would be more useful than the list of partial agreements and Committees - worthy though

1930:

We may or may not have a "formula for int. organizations" in the China case, I wouldn't know about that, but if we have one and those articles are showing it, it isn't the formula you are pressing for in the M. case. What you want here is analogous to using plain "Chinese Taipei" throughout there,

1627:

Yes, it is the flag of the Council. And I am not proposing to remove it completely (I resorted to the maybe slightly rash measure of removing it temporarily (!) to attract attention to the problem). I know that the confusion is inherent in the emblems of the Council. Therefore it shouldn't be made

1462:

has FYROM with quotes. The treaty site doesn't include quotes, so it's hard to say what the official position for the quotes is. It might be sensible to adopt a shortest-name-used-by-the-CoE policy, with an exception for Macedonia ("FYR Macedonia") and an accompanying footnote, so we don't have to

1412:

There's more than one list on the site, both in my post, and they are not consistent (Slovakia/Slovak Republic). Neither do we care about the CoE designations for other countries (Russian Federation) — it seems that anyone bothered enough to edit it only cares what Macedonia is named. I'm happy to

1239:

In many cases the information is needed, which is why I haven't made a fuss however some pages are starting to sound like promotional items. If you are such an editor please consider using citations for everything you write if it is direly needed. Otherwise inform others of information and sources

3580:

still does not verify your claim. The tweet makes zero mention of 2023 as the year of Russia's supposed year of withdrawal. I think you should retract that bold claim, considering there isn't currently any reliable evidence of it. All the sources I have come across confirm Russia has unilaterally

3483:

The article says that if a member state unilaterally wishes to formally leave the Council of Europe, then a member state would send a formal letter the Secretary General, asking that it would like leave the Council. If it is done between the 1 January and the 30 September, the withdrawment would

3313:

recommendation, since it 1) precisely reflects the CoE definition of these countries, 2) removes vague terms which could lead to confusion (Siberia/Anatolia) and overlapping/redundant terms (Eurasia) and 3) avoids cluttering the infobox. This option addresses both our primary concerns. Thoughts?

3230:

I don't think that's absolutely necessary, we don't want to overly clutter the infobox with every singe minor geographic anomaly or technicality. The infobox isn't the place for that. Besides, there is a separate article with a list of CoE member states where users may link to any of the country

1865:

You need to sharpen your sense of parallelism. With the Taiwan case, there is a three-way naming issue, and only one part of it is comparable to the Macedonia-in-international-organistions one. The double naming scheme of "Republic of China" + "Taiwan" is a cludge because in that case there's a

1478:

It has it under the statues, number one on the Council of Europe. All signatures to the statue are listed and it uses the extended term. The chances of the constitutional name being used when Greece is a member is slim and according to Knowledge (XXG) policy we have to follow the subject of the

1292:

uses "Slovakia", and also mentions "the Republic of Serbia" in a footnote, though it doesn't refer to it anywhere else. Unless someone can find an official document that gives countries' names, this probably isn't the way to go. Using "The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" in the table (it

2523:

Far from being out of context, Churchill was a key mover of the Council. The broadcast of 1943 was only the first of a series of advocacies. Considering who he was in the world of that time I regard the criticism of this section, rather than Churchill, as of little relevance. It represents the

1581:

After reviewing the article on the Council, it seems that the potential for confusion with institutions of the European Union is recognised, yet does little to alleviate it. For instance, the flag of Europe, simultaneously flag of the Council and the EU, is placed before the Council's logo and

1338:

Albania, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Malta, Moldova, Montenegro, Poland, Serbia, Slovenia, Turkey Portugese, Italian, French, Slovak Spain, Sweden, Belgium, Denmark, Norway

1915:

No, Fut. In China case you have a formula for int. organizations where certain special naming conventions are implemented and respected, and which could be a guide for us here as well. After all, the relevant bibliography (do some book-googling), when it is about int. organizations, it is not

3283:

Restoring to previous version (keeping both Europe and Asia) and specify the Asian regions’ names of the individual countries as other users once did; if we are not able to distinguish the Asian parts of Georgia and Azerbaijan, we can simply insert a foot note mark and explain these are

2376:

gloomy. The interesting question also is: if the CoE closes some of its foreign offices, how will it supervise the application of the Human Rights Convention in those countries? Wasn't the whole purpose of the CoE to ensure a constant supervision of the enforcement of human rights laws?

4006:

I know that there are statements in some versions of the article stating that Greece and Turkey both joined in 1949, but there are sources cited which claim that Turkey didn't actually join until 1950, after Iceland had joined. Does anybody have an explanation for this discrepancy?

3399:

The map has been changed, but I don’t know if it’s correct right now. As I understand it, Russia is suspended, but that doesn’t make it a non-member, right? Also, shouldn’t Kazakhstan be coloured in the same way as Russia and Belarus, since it is technically also a European country?

3127:

hobby horses and lobby organisations, only accountable to their funders. They operate in the political space without being elected or accountable. That is a concerning development which is why Russia has cracked down on these organisations. This is a potential point of conflict.

409: 825:

Kazakhstan is NOT AT ALL A EUROPEAN COUNTRY. For crying out loud, it lies on the Central Asian steppes - yes, it isnt a member, but neither is Uganda, and thats prolly as European as Kazakhstan. Someone please explain why Kazakhstan should be a European country???????? :

4085:. The only word they have in common is "Europe". I would argue that "Community" and "Council" aren't sufficiently confusable. Based on the Knowledge (XXG) article, it doesn't sound like the E.P.C. has any subsidiary organ with "council" (or a near-synonym) in its name. 2472:

The man was not in any way, shape or form planning things like a "Council of Europe" or a "United States of Europe" in the form(s) they have taken. Therefore, the current institutions have nothing to do with him. As Churchill said about his ideas as put forth by him:

1901:. I have no strong opinion about the table, but personally I guess I would prefer some bracketed or footnoted solution there too. But I have no intention of editing Taiwan-related issues. China is another mess; let's get our corner of Knowledge (XXG) tidied up first. 3305:", we can remove it altogether and replace with just Europe. Of course, we can add a foot note explaining that some member states have territory either wholly (Cyprus/Armenia) or partially (Georgia/Azerbaijan/Russia/Turkey) in Asia (similar to what is present in the 1231:

It is starting to become clear that there are a number of people and/or organisations (mainly of a European nature based in Strasbourg) are writing and editing articles about themselves. I would like to remind them that although new content is welcome, it is against

3372:

Russia has been suspended from the Council of Europe due to the ongoing invasion of Ukraine. I do not know how to edit the map so I will leave this message here. (If the invasion is over by the time someone sees this, they were suspended around 17:00 in UK time.)

1983:

a different convention from ours. And I never said we should make "f.Y.R." invisible – to the contrary, we should of course mention it in an article like this one, but mention it as part of what we are reporting, not use it as if it was our own preferred name.

2644:

The flag of Europe is indeed the official flag of the Council of Europe (CoE). The problem is that, flag of europe are more known for its use by the European Union (EU), as a result, its use in the infobox of the Council of Europe confuse (me, in the past and

1828:"the Republic of China (ROC) (commonly known as Taiwan, whose sovereignty has been disputed by the People's Republic of China) acceded to the WTO in 2002 under the name of "Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu" (Chinese Taipei)." 1952:

that the "FYROM" term is not banished as you would like it. To the contrary, it is broadly used. By the way, "reliable English-language sources" (quoted from your MOSMAC 3) does not mean only news media. There is a whole bibliography on this issue

1381:

It's a place in other neighbouring countries too, but they don't kick up a fuss. And "America" is two continents. But that's not the point — we should have a consistent way of naming the countries on the list, and we don't. Please sign your posts.

1260:

entry needs to reflect that there such criticism from a number of established and reputable sources. The current information on criticism may be too short still, as there likely are many more concerns out there, from established external sources. (

2020:

I do not think we should use the Taiwan/Republic of China/Chinese Taipei mess as a model. It is not a shining example of Wiki-neutrality, it is a cat-fight between two contending National Causes, occasionally tempered by outside intervention.

2106:

According to Jean-Louis Laurens, Director General of Democracy and Political Affairs at the Council of Europe EMNI; Kosovo can become a member of the CoE if Kosovo achieves 2/3 of a vote and Kosovo already has 2/3 recognition in the CoE.

1978:

sources use "f.Y.R.". But we must still settle for a single name to be our standard name throughout, and that is M. or R.o.M., and the only reason we should be introducing domain-specific exceptions is if the sourcing in that domain has

3539:

The source is not Knowledge (XXG) but the Treaty of London and there are no other withdrawal procedures. So unless the Council decides to speed up to process according to Article 8, there is no other legally confirmed withdrawal date.

3193: 1348:

I'm looking for either an official list of country names according to the CoE, or a good reason not to call it "Macedonia" and remove footnote b (or add a footnote for every country which is referred to as something else by the CoE).

1438:. All I can see on here is the former Yugoslav name (not suprising as Greece no doubt would not allow it to join under anything else. But if you can find a contradition in these pages, we'll have to find some other source to use. - 3595:

The tweet mentions Article 7 and Article 7 states that "Such withdrawal shall take effect at the end of the financial year in which it is notified, if the notification is given during the first nine months of that financial year."

3335:…we can remove it altogether and replace with just Europe. Of course, we can add a foot note explaining that some member states have territory either wholly (Cyprus/Armenia) or partially (Georgia/Azerbaijan/Russia/Turkey) in Asia… 4169: 2587:

The article implies that Vatican City has been excluded from membership of the CoE because it is a "theocracy". Firstly, one should question whether "Theocracy" is the best descriptor for the rather unique governmental system of

1541:

The map on the right side of the screen is helpful, but the color key is ridiculously small and, for me at least, illegible. Could someone please duplicate the map in the body of the article where the key might be made bigger?

1792:: refer to the country in our own voice, as we always do, using our own standard naming convention for it just like everywhere else. The fact that the organisation has its own naming convention is something that we should 1730:, Turkey was actually one of the earliest members of Council of Europe, but based on my reading that article, the membership ended due to a coup. Shouldn't stuff like this (on former members) be included in the article? -- 4120:

Alternatively, "Marija Pejčinović Burić, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign and European Affairs, was elected Secretary General of the Council of Europe on 26 June 2019. Her term began on 18 September 2019."

3729:

Since I care only about the file and you care only about the content and svg map was updated to your position, I will revert your change on technical grounds. Please update the map itself if you don't agree with it.

2413:

shows that an IP registered to the CoE has made the most edits to the article of anyone. A quick read shows large amounts of unsourced information and a lot is a copyvio. Help in reviewing this would be appreciated.

1124:

I do not believe this is the case; indeed, I think the anon is getting the Council of Europe confused with the European Union. I am reverting this change until such time as they provide a source for their assertion.

945:

19:26, 20 Nov 2003 (UTC) I looked it up on the COE website and Jaing is essentially correct: "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" — Knowledge (XXG) should reflect the COE terminolgy on the COE article page. -

3160: 1434:

states we use what subject uses - we use what the CoE uses. So I've gone through trying to find the official term, I think the closest we get is their treaty office here, as that should show what it signed up as:

4159: 828:

Err. Western end of Kazakhstan is considered part of Europe. Not a huge part, maybe 20% of the country, but it's considered European nevertheless. I'm sure there are many sites here that can show that to you.

2556:

At the File page (click the image), yellow shading for Israel is clear to me. Clear but not prominent; clear only upon search. I can't be sure there are no other yellows. Presumably tiny, such as Vatican City

1850:

Aha! So, should we also say here "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (commonly known as Macedonia) bla bla"? RoC is not the name commonly used everywhere. This is mentioned in the above excerpt only in

3331:, Considering the fact that all the respective countries (Caucasian countries, Cyprus, Russia, Turkey) are defined as “independent states” by the CoE, I think the suggestion below seems appropriate to apply: 1339:

Liechtenstein, Andorra, Monaco San Marino Germany Luzembourg Swiss Ukraine, (The) Netherlands, Ireland ("Republic of" may be used to distinguish it as a country, but is not its official name), Romania

1898:

the Republic of China (Taiwan), which acceded to the WTO in 2002, and carefully crafted its application by joining under the name "Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu (Chinese

1343:

We'd have to keep Bosnia-Herzegovina (since plain "Bosnia" probably wouldn't be acceptable to people living there), and "Czech Republic" (since nobody calls it Czech or Czecho). It would also mean using

1033:

whom applied for European Union membership but withdrew have signed agreements with the E.U. in 2006 and these countries are on the way to acquire observer status in the E.U. Indeed the 3 nations of the

805:

I thought about that as well. But only having it on the Talk-page could be OK. I am not going to force this, so if you think that it confuses those coming to the talk-page I am open to remove it. --

64: 4174: 1651:

reason. If people confuse the Council of Europe with the European Union because of one image then they should stick to reading the Simple English Knowledge (XXG) so its spelled out nice and clear.-

2286:

The European Convention on Human Rights is mentioned, as are the other 200 conventions. Should we mention the number of judgments or applications processed by the European Court of Human Rights? --

3612:

I have a counter-precedent however, look at Ukraine membership in CIS. It is unclear from the beginning and it is reflected in the article. So at best I could agree only to "unclear membership".

3941:

I'd like to know what we should do because I haven't seen any of the editors involved correct this number yet. Reuters (I just updated Current Events) said Russia withdrew from CoE voluntarily.

2429:

I don't see any major problems of bias or copyright now, so I assume that any such issues there may have been in 2010 have been resolved. If any remain, they should be flagged individually. --

1808:

Then, why in the case of RoChina-Chinese Taipei-Taiwan, Knowledge (XXG) is not doing the same? So, it is inaccurate what you say that this is what we always do. This is not what we always do.--

3128: 2764:

page. And its with the same copy/paste URL and comments. I'm starting to question this person's mental stability. I already contacted an admin to see what can be done to end this disruption.--

370: 3295:.Additionally, “Eurasia” is not a continent unlike the others (North America, Africa etc.). It also confuses me how come “Siberia and Anatolia” be misguided listings while “Eurasia” is not? 4214: 360: 3791: 1431: 1280:

Following the FYROM issue is that we should refer to countries with a sensible convention, such as (1) their name according to the CoE, (2) their official name, or (3) their common name.

3153: 2693: 3186: 4304: 4114:

General of the Council of Europe on 29 September 2009. In June 2014, he became the first Secretary General to be re-elected, commencing his second term in office on 1 October 2014."

3309:

article itself). I believe this to be a fair suggestion, considering that the CoE does classify these member states to be politically "European", as you have pointed out. This is a

2482:

It should be built by the English. If it were built by the Russians, there would be communism and squalour. If it were built by the Germans, there would be tyranny and brute force.

1200:

these may well be. This reads as though written by someone who knows so much about the Council that these simple references are enough to explain; but to the outsider, they aren't.

2790:

after its creation the CoE would still have no rule on how to sack one of its governing members after a vote of non confidence and several calls to resign, but here you go: (about

3522:

Can you, or any other editor, provide a reliable source (that isn't Knowledge (XXG)) confirming Russian membership until 2023? If not, your claim can't be 100% verified. Regards,

4219: 1695:

job to change reality. What I will alter the line at the top to make it clearer that there is no connection. If they fail to read that then I really have no sympathy for them.-

914:

the English equivalent of what the COE lists as the name? That should prevail over any POV. This is the COE article and nothing more. There should be no arguing here about it -

336: 3632:

and reinstate the updated map, it should remain at least until you or someone else can provide at least one reliable source confirming Russia's membership until 2023. Regards,

2129:

We've seen another flurry of anonymous edits to this page, presumably from Council of Europe hacks. What induces them to redraw the boundaries of Europe to include Kazakhstan?

3109:

I believe that a section should definitely be added to reflect Russia's voting suspension at the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council, as this is an element of importance. --

2796:

Ausbügeln kann diesen Fehler nur der Präsident selbst und zwar mit einem Rücktritt, denn über Regeln, ihn des Amtes zu entheben, verfügt der Europarat im Augenblick noch nicht

3278:

Despite the above, in my opinion, we must go in line with the predominantly accepted geographic definitions for such “infobox” templates. We can apply one of the two options:

35: 2410: 4209: 3051: 3047: 3033: 2907: 2903: 2889: 459: 3860:

Hi all, the Euler diagram for the CoE needs updating to reflect Russia leaving it. I have no idea how to edit it's formatting, so if anyone does that would be grand.

1394:

Oh the FYROM issue again, I'm quite sure this whole problem was designed for the sole pourpose of annoying Wikipedians. There is a list of members at the CoE website

548: 327: 304: 4043:

Evidently the Rollback button doesn't allow for an edit summary (mea culpa; re-noted for the future), so I'm putting my justification of my rollback of the IP user @

2205:

like me who have confused the two organisations, and who, as a consequence, give more credit to Council of Europe pronouncements than they might otherwise deserve.

4244: 4229: 538: 449: 2985: 1399:

call it Macedonia, everyone does, but while this dispute is still going on we should stick to FYROM. People know what it means either way, esp. with the flag. -

2799: 4154: 653: 4234: 3484:

happen at the 31 December on that year. If it is done between the 1 October to the 31 December, then it would happen on the 31 December the following year.

1789:

talking about that country, not the Council of Europe talking about it, so we should do what we and common English usage and reliable sources out there do

2869: 425: 4299: 4294: 4289: 4284: 4279: 4274: 4269: 4249: 2608:

in Russia - both states which had a multitude rulings against their handling of human rights in the past years. I will get to this in detail on weekend.

981:

In particular, this article will be affected, among some others. If you happen to have an opinion for or against this proposition, please vote on it at

514: 281: 180: 896:

Jiang's version even now says "Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia", it just doesn't link the whole name, so I don't see what the issue is really. --

4259: 1727: 1185:

I heard that Serbia will be the next Head country of the CE, but I failed to see any mention that there is a leading country in the article at all. --

643: 2694:

https://wcd.coe.int/com.instranet.InstraServlet?command=com.instranet.CmdBlobGet&InstranetImage=565003&SecMode=1&DocId=717532&Usage=2

4184: 170: 1830:

The name Knowledge (XXG) itself uses in this sentence is the one we commonly use everywhere, and the one chosen by the organisation in question is

4199: 4164: 2756:, thanks for your input. Unfortunately, looks like the user just reversed your edits, like he did countless times before, and now went further by 271: 3832: 3822: 3689:

not saying your wrong, but you haven't quite backed up your bold claim. Therefore, it is logical of us to default to Russia's announced position

3023: 4264: 4239: 4224: 926:

link to the respective redirect. While the former could be explained with accuracy and honoring the dispute, the latter is really pointless. --

2201:

The flag shown for the Council of Europe is the same flag as is shown on the European Union Knowledge (XXG) page. Surely that can't be right?

619: 416: 393: 4189: 4144: 2208:

Maybe there could be more emphasis in the article on the difference between the two organisations, the areas of authority, and their powers.

856: 2995: 1288:, Russia should be "Russian Federation", "Bosnia-Herzegovina" should be "Bosnia and Herzegovina", and Slovakia should be "Slovak Republic". 798:

Erm, I would be against incorporating any EU template as the CoE suffers from being confused with the EU and this would only make it worse!

505: 482: 4204: 3388: 3252: 3216: 2539: 2145: 3215:

Should we add the British Overseas Territories into infobox and page in general? (For example; Falkland Islands, Akrotiri, Dhekelia etc.)

2325:

Maybe the reason it isn't being reported is because no one will notice. And it is perhaps overshadowed by the massive national cuts which

146: 788:

Although the COE is not part of the European Union I thought that it might be useful to put the European Union template on this page. --

4078: 3346: 2494: 1988: 1943: 1905: 1870: 1842: 1800: 1212: 1067: 836: 686: 4254: 4067: 3707:

Since the sources are contradictory, status quo would be to revert to the time before the announcement when all positions were clear.

3646:

You should update the SVG map on Commons then, not to add a new ugly raster map. But I still don't see your sources, reliable or not.

3328: 3273: 2253: 1611:

Its the flag of the Council! Yes its confusing but the situation itself is like that, we can't change reality because its confusing.-

3132: 3982: 3843: 3029:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

2885:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

2875: 2308: 1336:. Only four countries have their common name as their official name . For the most part, the official names are far, far too long. 1233: 610: 571: 1582:

unproportionately bigger. IMO, this only reinforces common misconceptions. Would it be possible to amend the placement and scale?

4194: 4179: 2826: 3414:

Yes, Russia is still a member - for this exact moment. However, the article doesn't even clearly state that Russia is a member.

2164:

Can we get a reference that they're considered 'founding states'? Though it's very probable, I would still like to see a cite. —

1939:

of sources following such a special convention, including popular sources such as news media, and I'm not seeing that anywhere.

1596:

I have removed the flag of Europe from the infobox (it remains in the body of the article), until a better solution can be found

4149: 1374: 2986:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080528112349/http://www.coe.int/t/dg2/trafficking/campaign/Source/PDF_Conv_197_Trafficking_E.pdf

242: 203: 137: 98: 73: 2108: 1985: 1940: 1902: 1867: 1839: 1797: 3301:

no need to get that technical here. However, I do see your point and in order to appease your concern regarding the use of "

3909:

I didn't edit this because I saw there's a small edit war going on, so I'd rather ask the people who are active right now.

2817:"Nothing is going in the wrong direction with the assembly as such" says "...the chairman of the United Left, the Dutchman 2653:. Good, then, is the flag of europe only exist in a similar conceptual framework within the Council of Europe article (the 1516:

Good work. I think the template might be a bit far, but I don't think it would do it any damage to tinker with it a bit. -

4052: 2484: 2478: 3201: 3168: 3094: 2950: 2524:

commentator's personal opinion, which we can safely disregard. Here is a website for reference on Churchill's advocacy:

1159: 2870:

http://www.mipim.com/App/homepage.cfm?appname=100517&moduleid=288&campaignid=11888&iUserCampaignID=43827991

1479:

article. However if it is in a footnote because we don't want to make the table too wide, that ought to be fit okay. -

1054:

which remains under Israeli occupation is an internationally recognized soveriegn state. Only one observer member, the

770: 3005: 2989: 2822: 2613: 1956:. Therefore, ablishing "FYROM" where it is used as you systematically do in all int. orgs article is also what we are 766: 2646: 3793:

Council of Europe leaders make joint statement on the exclusion of the Russian Federation from the Council of Europe

1496: 982: 3536:

Russia is not a full member, it is a suspended member, it is also known to ignore ECHR decisions for years by now.

2538:

Perhaps it can be modified, or provided with a caption in its use here, to say whether there is yellow shading. --

2450: 2627: 2597: 2525: 3050:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

2906:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

1495:

Done. The article no longer mentions "Macedonia" outside of the FYROM context. I'm tempted to add quotes to the

3933:. There's a few mentions of "46 members" around the article, including in the first paragraph and the infobox: 3384: 2149: 1823: 3291:

However I believe that we must specify “Europe” at all, as this page refers to a pan-European organisation so

3220: 2543: 2491:

Since neither the CofE nor the EU were built by the English, the reference is isolated and purely incidental.

1882:. you'll see that in the table it is "Chinese Taipei". Are you going to turn it into "Taiwan"? Or what then?-- 822:

WHAT "With the exception of Belarus and Kazakhstan all European states have acceded to the Council of Europe"

79: 30: 3350: 3182:

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

3024:

http://www.lalsace.fr/fr/france-monde/article/3340157,218/Reduction-drastique-des-activites-a-Strasbourg.html

1896:

In that article, too, the first mention in the text itself is the full description along the correct schema:

1664:

a specific solution to this article, especially since only minor changes would lead to visible improvement.

1359:

The problem is that it is also a province in Greece. They would be the same name for two different places.

960:

It has been proposed that uses of terms Macedonia¤, Macedonian¤, and Macedonians¤ in articles mentioning the

840: 3405: 3197: 3164: 3085: 2977: 2941: 2853: 2498: 2115: 1772: 1216: 1169: 1071: 332: 3959:

Oh, I just noticed that number has been changed a few days ago. Disregard my message, sorry for the ping.

3376: 3342: 2249: 1362: 832: 4028: 3894: 3880: 3780: 3735: 3712: 3679: 3651: 3617: 3567: 3545: 3494: 3456: 2973: 2609: 2582: 2382: 2315: 2257: 2165: 1459: 3989: 3380: 2996:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080528112354/http://www.coe.int/t/DC/Press/Source/PressFile_%20AGORA_fr.pdf

1558:

was need to get the font to round to 9pt on Mac. This may behave differently on other operating systems.

922:

The problem is only with Vergina who seems to believe that we need to display the ridiculously long name

774: 4044: 4012: 3750: 3698: 3665: 3637: 3586: 3527: 3513: 3474: 3401: 3319: 3260: 3236: 3069:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

3057: 2925:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

2913: 2364:

The choice of words was the journalist's, not mine. Or, more exactly, I paraphrased half-sentences like

2134: 2059: 2044: 1965: 1921: 1887: 1856: 1813: 1140: 1063: 1051: 961: 860: 618: