Talk:Consul (representative)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. 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 articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Consuls in Samoa

I removed this text —

- Friedrich Rose (German Consul) (b. 1855 - d. 1922)
- Ernest George Berkeley Maxse (British Consul) (b. 1863 - d. 1943) - to 23 June 1899, succeeded by a mister Nair (acting British consul)
- Luther Wood Osborn (U.S. Consul) (b. 1843 - d. 1901)

— from the area about Samoa, as it seemed too detailed for this article (names of various other consuls are not mentioned elsewhere). If anyone feels otherwise, feel free to put them back. :: Salvo (talk) 07:37, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is an absolutely unique case, where the 'consular' officials are de facto joint heads of government, and an unparallelled triple condominium; so I put them back Fastifex 11:03, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Samoa content has since been moved to Administrative Consul, which seems like a good idea Somej (talk) 00:58, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is the consulate part of the territory of the country it belongs to like an embassy?

For some reason the current article seems to adress everything BUT useful information and distinctions...

I wondered that myself, and am not sure if the sentence "Even within another state, a foreign power often has extraterritorial rights over its official representation (such as a consulate)" is meant to mean. Note that this issue is likely to get some attention because of the recent raid of the US military on the Iranian consulate in Iraq.

I found the following in the "Convention on Consular Relations" (linked from the article). My WP skills are not very good, and I would prefer if someone else could put this in the article, or make it more clear.

“

1.Consular premises shall be inviolable to the extent provided in this article.

2.The authorities of the receiving State shall not enter that part of the consular premises which is used exclusively for the purpose of the work of the consular post except with the consent of the head of the consular post or of his designee or of the head of the diplomatic mission of the sending State. The consent of the head of the consular post may, however, be assumed in case of fire or other disaster requiring prompt protective action.

3.Subject to the provisions of paragraph 2 of this article, the receiving State is under a special duty to take all appropriate steps to protect the consular premises against any intrusion or damage and to prevent any disturbance of the peace of the consular post or impairment of its dignity.

4.The consular premises, their furnishings, the property of the consular post and its means of transport shall be immune from any form of requisition for purposes of national defence or public utility. If expropriation is necessary for such purposes, all possible steps shall be taken to avoid impeding the performance of consular functions, and prompt, adequate and effective compensation shall be paid to the sending State.

”

The language seems slightly weaker than that of the "Convention on Diplomatic Relations"

85.81.63.6 23:36, 11 January 2007 (UTC) NisJorgensen (not logged in)[reply]

Original Research

Unpublished PhD research is original research and cannot be used for reference until published, yes? Mikebar (talk) 18:06, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I understand it, yeah, it can only be used as a reference when it is published (I don't know how someone can check something that is not published, anyway?) as per WP:OR,

"Material for which no reliable source can be found is considered original research. The only way you can show that your edit does not come under this category is to produce a reliable published source that contains that same material."

(emphasis mine) --JCrue (talk) 21:13, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Picture

Is the picture of Franklin Huddle really appropriate? He doesn't look distinctively to be a consul, to be honest. I don't know, is he supposed to be particularly famous as one? Maybe a picture of a consul... Consuling, as it were, if we need a picture of a person at all... --JCrue (talk) 21:13, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How would a person "distinctively" look like a person in X position?
There needs to be a visual example of a person who serves as a consul general, considering the article is about a position held by a person. Because Huddle served in many countries, I used him as an example of one. If one wants a better known/more famous consul general instead, then he or she can replace the photo with one. WhisperToMe (talk) 05:48, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge from Consul general

The consul general article is particularly weak and short now. Some of its information is already in this article and the rest can be easily transferred. Until somebody can build an appropriate article for the topic, I think it should be merged into this article, perhaps with its own section heading. Thoughts? -- Infoman99 (talk) 18:54, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of Consuls by Country

It would seem appropriate to include in this article a simple list of Consuls and Vice Consuls by name with date(s) of service and assigned location(s). I'm no expert in these matters but there are sources (eg, The Political Graveyard http://politicalgraveyard.com/ ) which could be utilized if someone were so inclined and had the time. JimScott (talk) 18:40, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@JimScott: Suggest better to start by the Country sending the diplomat, then by the country sent to, eg eg List of diplomats of Great Britain to the Republic of Genoa. Suggest also that someone create new page - history of the foreign affairs service of the USA. Somej (talk) 00:52, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Consul (representative). 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:03, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 29 March 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus, defaulting to the status quo. That is, in the absence of agreement here, Consul (pre-contemporary) will go back to its historical title. No prejudice on opening a new RM immediately to find a clearer consensus of what to do with these articles and dab pages. Cúchullain ^t/c 19:44, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Consul (representative) → Consul – On 15 March 2018‎, Mksword moved Consul to Consul (Roman magistrate) (and then to Consul (pre-contemporary)) and changed Consul to a redirect page to Consul (representative). If Consul (representative) is really the primary topic, it should be moved to Consul per Wikipedia:Disambiguation. If not, Consul (disambiguation) should be moved to Consul, or Consul (pre-contemporary) should be moved back to Consul. I am neutral on this issue. I initiate this discussion because redirecting a word to the word with disambiguating parentheses violates Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Is there a primary topic? and should be fixed. Hope we can find a solution. Neo-Jay (talk) 05:25, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose first option the 15 March move by Mksword was not unreasonable in moving Roman Consul out of baseline, but not helpful to redirect to modern diplomat. Swaps between primary topics are almost always bad news. Instead take the middle ground of support second option proposed by Neo-Jay; and move Consul (disambiguation) to baseline. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:18, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Move Consul (disambiguation) to Consul instead. As a side comment, Consul (pre-contemporary) is a weird article... feels more like a long-form disambiguation page, here are some unrelated topics that happen to share the same name. It should possibly be merged with the disambiguation page and chopped down. SnowFire (talk) 14:54, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- The current Consul (pre-contemporary) is a lot like a WP:CONCEPTDAB. If others agree that this is the case, then shouldn't this article occupy the primary space? — AjaxSmack 21:19, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Consul (pre-contemporary) strikes me as a very strange title anyway. I suggest reverting any undiscussed moves here. Dekimasuよ! 00:25, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a great concept dab IMHO, if that was the goal. There don't appear to really be any similarities between the roles other than a very loose descent from Roman consul. It'd be like trying to make a Caesar (post-Roman) article that connected Russian Czar, German Kaiser, etc. as having anything in common other than name origin (see Caesar (title)#Legacy. SnowFire (talk) 12:44, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Next moves?

Hi all, I saw this discussion a bit late to contribute. However I do support an effort to tidy up these pages. What should be included in the scope of a reorganisation? To start the discussion, I'd suggest:

Consul (disambiguation) Keep this page basically as it is now. Tidy up the first section so that it links into the following pages, or to sections in those pages.

Then, as @Neo-Jay: suggested, make Consul a sort of long disambiguation page of the various uses in government and diplomacy over time. A structure for it could be:

Types of consul

Consuls in governments

Roman Consul
Consul#French Revolution (As a new page, just moving the content)
French Consulate

Consuls in Colonial Administration

Administrative consul (already includes the Samoan example above)
Consul (administrative) A new page, that redirects to Administrative consul

Consuls in diplomacy and international affairs

Consul (representative), a representative in one country of the government of another
Consul General, the head of a consular mission
Honorary Consul
Consular corps
Consulates in extraterritorial jurisdictions (is this still needed as a separate page? Content could probably go into Consul (representative))

Consuls by country

lists of consuls of various countries, eg List of diplomats of Great Britain to the Republic of Genoa

And finally I'd suggest moving all the detail in US content out of these pages and into a (new) history of the USA foreign affairs service. [Done - see Draft:Consuls in the Foreign Service of the USA Somej (talk) 08:51, 22 May 2018 (UTC)][reply]

What do you all think? Somej (talk) 23:41, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Somej: So, your suggestions are not about moving pages (renaming pages), but just about editing the content of them. Is my understanding correct? --Neo-Jay (talk) 02:02, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Neo-Jay: Yes, it would mostly move content between the existing pages, and then create new pages for some of the detailed content. Should we also move the wiktionary|consul tag from Consul (disambiguation) to consul? Somej (talk) 09:31, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Somej: Template:Wiktionary can be added to Consul. But it does not need to be removed from Consul (disambiguation). --Neo-Jay (talk) 09:58, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Neo-Jay: I've reworked the proposed structure above slightly, having found the pages Administrative consul and Consulates in extraterritorial jurisdictions. And added the wiktionary tag as you suggested, to both Consul and * Administrative consul Somej (talk) 00:34, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Somej: Thank you! --Neo-Jay (talk) 09:05, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Summary of recent changes

I've removed the

tag from this page; it's looking reasonably balanced now.

The main Consul page has been restructured as suggested above. Is it still too long? Somej (talk) 04:23, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]