Talk:List of European commissioners by member state

Merge

As far as I can see the pages Romanian European Commissioner and Bulgarian European Commissioner are extenuous and can easily be diverted here, any information about representation of states could be moved to the Commission page itself. Though List of European Commissioners from Ireland contains some extra information that would be useful and isn't on here, perhaps that should simply be put on the Commissioners pages themselves? JLogan 16:23, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

As the creator of List of European Commissioners from Ireland, i agree that it could be merged in here, but yes, the exta info - some commissioners served more than once, and it gives dates of service - needs to be incorporated. It also gives name of nominating Taoiseach but I only included that to illustrate that Mr Haughey of FF nominated Burke of FG. That could be covered by a reference note.--Rye1967 11:44, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I've added information about nomination from different political parties including that reference, do you think that would be okay? Not sure about dates, all the various Commissions they served in are shown, and dates can be found out from the Commission pages. If they left earlier or were appointed later I have shown that through ref notes, is there anything missing. I think adding a box for full dates might be a bit much considering they should be added to all if that were the case and would replicate the Commission info. -JLogan 20:51, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I have created the page "Romanian European Commissioner" and it is true it is a good idea to merge it with this comprehensive list here. --Michkalas 18:10, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I have created the page Bulgarian European Commissioner and I believe that it should stay alone and not be merged. It can be developed even further. List of EU Commissioners by Nationality will give the basic information while you can find extended information at the particular page.

What did you have in mind for that though? The reason I proposed this is that the information on the pages appears to be either the same for many positions, if not all, or particular to an individual commissioner so what information could be put in the page that could not go on either this list, the Commissioners page, the portfolio page or the politics pages of each member-state? I'm certainly not convinced it would warrant its own page. perhaps the commission information could be merged with accession/membership information to be a general "Bulgarian EU Membership" page? -JLogan 14:00, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Addition: My proposal to replace both accession and commissioner pages; Bulgarian Membership of the European Union. -JLogan 14:24, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

You can add pictures of the first and most recent Commissioner on a particular page. If you do that here it will be too much. As far as I can see the European Union is something that is here to stay. If it was a historical organization that does no longer exists then it is ok to merge the different articles. The European Union will continue to grow and instead of merging and making less articles we should make sure that all aspects are covered. This is even more important when it cames to the European Commission that governs the Union. Bulgaria entered the European Union 2 months ago and has only one commissioner. However, they will have a second and a third one. Lets wait. Why destroying an article now when eventually we will need to create it again.

None of the old states apart from Ireland have needed a separate article for their Commissioners, if the Bulgarian Commissioner's Post becomes of some high importance in the future we could always bring it back but right now what's wrong with including the paragraph of information we have on it within a larger context? I appreciate what your saying but it thus far the individual nationality of commissioners posts doesn't seem to be a big enough deal for us to have yet another stub. But perhaps some other people give their opinions on this? (p.s. please sign your posts) -JLogan 23:28, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I gave the Bulgarian Commissioner as an example. As for the Commissioners from the other countries I guess no one wanted to spent time creating the articles. Which does not means that they are not important or relevant. There will be more commissioners from each country and they should have space separate from just one big article that briefly mentions them.

Though equally a page wasn't created because there wasn't a need for one, what can one say about, for example, the post of the German Commissioner? I've mentioned allocation of seats and included minor points as refs. A particular point on nomination or a commissioner can be expressed in the person or portfolio page as currently. I guess that's my main concern that we have so many different pages for commissioners already, we have their personal page, their portfolio page and the Commission page. Nationality is a very simple element (especially as they don't represent their country) and there is very little one could say about any single commissioners nationality beyond that mentioned in all those other articles. -JLogan 20:38, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I had created the article on the Romanian Commissioner, not, of course, because I had some time to spent, but because at the time the "List of European Commissioners by nationality" didn't exist and I thought there was enough material for a separate article on the Romanian Commissioner, as there are transitional provisions for the first appointment after the accession. But it seems that apart from the quote there is nothing really to be added. The quote or the information without a direct quote can be merged into the Bulgarian Membership and/or accession article (or the the merged version of these two) and also in the history section of the article on the European Commission (together, perhaps, with the information on which countries had two Commissioners and when and how they have lost the one). Maybe some redirects should be created from "Romanian European Commissioner" and "Romanian European Commissioners" to this list, instead of just deleting the articles. I believe this is the case for "Bulgarian European Commissioner" too. There is nothing different kind of information included in the two articles or any particularity for the Bulgarian Commissioner that it is not present in the case of the Romanian Commissioner. It is about the same provision in the same Treaty. Anyway, the article on the Romanian Commissioner should be merged into this list even if the anonymous user insists that the article s/he has created should stay as it is. P.S. Please, sign your comments -it makes reading the talk page much more easier and helps us identify who says and does what. You can sign by typing four times ~. --Michkalas 17:23, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I support the idea of merging the List of Bulgarian Comissioners into the new central list. I see no convincing reason to have a special list for Bulgarian Comissioners when no other country now has such a list. I see no reason for the fore-seeable future to have a seperate list for each country. If such a need arises, the re-direct can be cancelled--Rye1967 00:28, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks both of you, just put the redirects in place (before I logged in, that was me). -JLogan 09:38, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Format

The format I used was basically along these lines;

Commissioner	Portfolio	Commission	Party
Name	Position A/Position B	Commission 1 with post A/Commission 2 with post B & Commission 3 with post B	Party

With refs for any dates outside the commission term. This was to avoid having a list of repeated names spread across lists, insted having all the details of a commissioner in one line which I think works even if it is a bit complex in some respects. But if someone has a better idea could it please be applied to all insted just one list to avoid making it even more confusing. -JLogan 16:18, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Luxembourg

Okay, is it Luxembourger, Luxembourgish or Luxembourgian? I've seen all three on wikipedia so can someone find some source of authority on it please? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JLogan (talk • contribs) 19:57, 13 April 2007 (UTC).

The Oxford Dictionary of English (Second Edition, 2003) says Luxembourger. Q300r bc2 (talk) 22:12, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Since I added that first comment, the WikiProject for Luxembourg has decided to make all references on Wikipedia "Luxembourgian". So you'll have to take it up with them now.- J Logan ^t: 20:39, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Colours?! Dates?!

I stumbled upon this page and am highly surprised about two things:

1. what on earth do the colours in the tables mean, and why isn't that explained anywhere in the article?
2. why are there hardly any dates of when a commissioner was in office? Now it seems there's hundreds of current commissioners..

Therefore I added the missing information template. Hope someone can at least explain the colours.. Q300r bc2 (talk) 22:05, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

You're absolutely right -- to those questions I'd add the question "why the hell are they in reverse chronological order?" Everything else on WP seems to be in ordinary chronological order... —Nightstallion 10:41, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

a) their political colours, that has been added in already. b) we don't know most of the dates, if you want to find them out go right ahead. And in regards to the order, well most recent can be first too if you're looking for someone. Doesn't matter as far as I'm concerned. You want to switch them all, be my guest.- J Logan ^t: 20:37, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Mh, fair enough. Let's leave it like that. —Nightstallion 21:15, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

I would have expected, from the main heading, a list of Commissioners holding office TODAY, or at least a list from which this was obvious.

Not so. Is there even such a list on Wiki? If so, shouldn't this article give a reference to it? Keithbowden (talk) 11:31, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

More clearly identify incumbent

A reader contacted Wikimedia regarding this article. While a careful read of the texts indicates that it is a list of all commissioners, and one can figure out that they are listed in order so the incumbent is the last in the list, it is hardly obvious. I urge someone to consider improving the presentation. One option is to add dates of service as a column heading which would help make it clear. Another option is to use a textual indication (italics, or bold) to distinguish the incumbent.--S Philbrick(Talk) 15:19, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Two suggestions

I have two suggestions for this article:

1. I would add dates;
2. I would eliminate EAEC authority and ECSC members or improve clarity.

Thanks, --Checco (talk) 16:54, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Images please

Could you please add headshots of the commissioners? If that is not possible could you please link to an external resource that features pictures?--2A02:810A:11BF:E564:512A:8EBE:30F:D65E (talk) 19:15, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Article's name

Shouldn't this article be more correctly named "List of European Commissioners by country" or "by member country"? -- Checco (talk) 05:18, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Agree, it should say List of European Commissioners by member state. I can make the change after one week if there are no objections (in time for the new nominees). Therequiembellishere (talk) 21:06, 25 June 2024 (UTC)