Wikipedia talk:WikiProject International relations/Archive 5
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:WikiProject International relations. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 |
Deletion discussion - List of Guantanamo Bay detainees accused of possessing Casio watches
You may be interested in this deletion discussion for the List of Guantanamo Bay detainees accused of possessing Casio watches. Diego (talk) 13:12, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
Polishdippassport.jpg
image:Polishdippassport.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 70.24.250.103 (talk) 16:42, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
Swedendippassport.jpg
file:Swedendippassport.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 00:27, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
FRpass1.jpg
image:FRpass1.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 01:04, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
HKeDOIcover.PNG
file:HKeDOIcover.PNG has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 23:31, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
Auscoi.jpg
image:Auscoi.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 23:37, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
Japan Re-entry Permit Cover.png
image:Japan Re-entry Permit Cover.png has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 00:02, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
File:Israeli laissez-passer.jpg
File:Israeli laissez-passer.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 00:23, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
A Call for Diplomatic Reciprocity
Greetings WikiProject IR! I come to you because of a simple observation. I wanted to discover who was the ambassador from Argentina to the United States during el Proceso. But in my searches, I can only find a page that lists U.S. Ambassadors to Argentina! Perusing Category:Lists of ambassadors I find that this one-sided relationship is common, if not universal. So I guess I am offering a friendly suggestion that we should have reciprocal coverage of diplomatic presence. Thanks, gracias. Paz. groupuscule (talk) 03:51, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Who is this Swedish ambassador?
On Arab Radio and Television there was a program called (in its English subtitles) "An Interview with: The Former Swedish Ambassador, Knut Burnstrom" (I think the Arabic is Arabic: مقابلة مع سعادة السفير السويدى كنوت بيرنستروم) where it said there was a former Swedish Ambassador named "Knut Burnstrom". Professor Adly Abu Jabar is the presenter of this program and Mohamed Qablawi is the director.
However when I google "Knut Burnstrom" I only get two Google hits, so I assume the subtitles didn't spell his name correctly. The Arabic "كنوت بيرنستروم" doesn't seem to return much either. Does anyone know what the actual spelling is?
Some hints: The program says he became "Sayed Mohamad Knut" once he converted to Islam. It said he had important positions in Sweden, Europe, and the U.S. In 1963 his first post was the Ambassador to Venezuela. He became the undersecretary of Scandinavian Affairs of the Swedish Foreign Ministry in 1966. He became the Swedish ambassador to the United Nations in 1971. He became the Swedish Ambassador to Spain in 1976. He later became the ambassador to Colombia, Mauritania, Morocco, and Senegal. He said he saw Muslims practicing in Morocco and that inspired him.
Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 16:50, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
- I found out it is Mohammed Knut Bernström and someone found the correct Arabic WhisperToMe (talk) 18:23, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Cooperative WikiProject
WikiProject Globalization, with assistance from Outlines WikiProject, has drafted an Outline of globalization. We welcome your input, additions, and comments. Meclee (talk) 16:58, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
| Dear members of the WikiProject International relations WikiProject. This notification is sent from the Articles for Improvement team to let you know that the article Global financial system, which has been tagged as part of the project, has been selected to receive community improvement.
Users and members of the project that are willing to help, may do so in the article's entry on the Articles for Improvement page. |
|
| Regards. Meclee (talk) 16:58, 23 June 2013 (UTC) |
One of your project's articles has been featured
 Hello, |
One of your project's articles has been featured
Hello, |
{{Latin Union}}
Template:Latin Union (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) has been nominated for deletion -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 05:50, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
Missing topics page
I have updated Missing topics about Diplomacy - Skysmith (talk) 10:06, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
International organization templates up for deletion
See Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2013 August 30 where most of the major international organizations templates are up for deletion -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 11:36, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
- Also Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2013 August 31
- Also Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2013 August 29
- Also Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2013 August 27
- Also Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2013 August 26
- -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 00:48, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads-up! bobrayner (talk) 13:31, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
IIA Delegates.jpg
image:IIA Delegates.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 65.92.181.39 (talk) 04:17, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
"Libya's reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence" proposed move to "Kosovo–Libya relations"
Please can you voice your opinions here. Regards IJA (talk) 19:17, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Category bloat
I asked this question at talk page of military history:
- Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armies in the Field (1929) is a short article but the number of categories at the bottom is huge because many counties in existence at that time signed up for it. The article on the Fourth Geneva Convention has many more, but it is not so obvious because the article is longer and the categories will probably not appear without scrolling the page. Has anyone given any thought to how to handle category bloat?
and was advised this would a more appropriate forum. Any thoughts? -- PBS (talk) 08:50, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
- I cannot understand how this rote categorisation might benefit readers. It's got out of control. bobrayner (talk) 00:17, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
- I'll be honest, I don't know if we should use categories or lists in regards to treaties by country. Category bloat has become quite the issue with things like this and categories for awards for another example. (example: see the categories on Douglas MacArthur) — dainomite 00:35, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Adding a couple of parameters to Template:Infobox bilateral relations
There is currently as suggestion and code written for a change to the template which would allow ambassadors and embassies to be added within the infobox. I'll make the change to the template in a couple of days if no one was an objection. Regards, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:32, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
RfC: Edward Snowden
I started a request for comment at Edward Snowden#added videos. All views are welcome. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 06:23, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Article needed on diplomatic crisis between the Dominican Republic and Haiti in 2013
On the Spanish Wikipedia, I discovered: es:Crisis diplomática entre República Dominicana y Haití de 2013. I realized there is no English article. Is anyone interested in starting it? WhisperToMe (talk) 01:26, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
FAR notice
I have nominated League of Nations for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.
This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.
If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.
Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.
Thanks. — Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 09:16, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)
COP19 Climate Change Conference in Warsaw – Cooperation?
Info-Ping: Translation requested for current COP19-Conference-article: German-English ...Spanish, or? --LudwigSebastianMicheler (talk) 03:26, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Trade graphs in bilateral relations articles
I come seeking further input into an editorial choice as to whether to include trade graphs in bilateral relations articles. I create these as part of an automated process which produces up-to-date graphs of all time-series statistical data provided by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. Because I am now quite familiar with the types of data they collect, I and others have found uses on wiki articles for around [250 of them]. User:Libstar has started removing them for a variety of reasons: "We don't put monthly trade graphs in these articles", "We don't put monthly trade charts that are never updated" (they are updated), "these don't appear for other series of bilaterals", "no consenus to include monthly trade figures especially when trade is so small". So we started a discussion, but mid-conversation, he has declared on the basis of his own dissent that there is no consensus to include. So I'm here seeking further input. Do you think trade graphs are useful on bilateral relations articles? --99of9 (talk) 09:41, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
- my reasons are in the discussion, I have particular issue with the y axes skewing peaks especially when trade is so low in some instances a graphical representation doesn't say much. And these graphs don't offer the reader any explanation for peaks and troughs as 99of9 has merely dumped them onto Australian bilateral articles. On the same token, should we put monthly traffic data on highway articles or monthly share data on major company articles. The presentation of graphs must actually add meaning not simply be a dump of data. LibStar (talk) 12:42, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
- I ask other editors what the value is of charts like this? LibStar (talk) 13:13, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
- I like the data-rich approach. It would make a refreshing change on articles which are otherwise quite offputting to the average reader. bobrayner (talk) 21:08, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
- so Bob do you also support publicly available traffic data being inserted into highway articles? and monthly share value data into company articles? LibStar (talk) 22:45, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
- Those are different things, of course; but if you genuinely want to know, I'm sure that the average highway article couldn't be made any worse for readers by diversifying its content, since existing images are usually a stylised decorative roadsign, and perhaps an unreadable locator map. bobrayner (talk) 23:02, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
- so Bob do you also support publicly available traffic data being inserted into highway articles? and monthly share value data into company articles? LibStar (talk) 22:45, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
- I like the data-rich approach. It would make a refreshing change on articles which are otherwise quite offputting to the average reader. bobrayner (talk) 21:08, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
This Trinidad example shows skewing spikes with axes with a very low base. LibStar (talk) 00:22, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
- So there are spikes on the graphs. So what? If there are spikes in real-world data, I'm cool with that. Maybe editors could even develop further text around the real-world events (seasonal patterns, big contracts, whatever) that led to the spikes. If the spikes are are an artefact of the graphing method then I would agree that spiky graphs should be removed or, better, if smoother data is available (ie. annual figures), just use that instead. bobrayner (talk) 09:11, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
- the spikes can be exaggerated with the selection of y axis. You see that when companies or sales people want to exaggerate growth. You suggest " Maybe editors could even develop further text around the real-world events". 99of9 has inserted at least 30 of these graphs with zero attempt to explain what is going on and when countries do less trade than what a multimillionaire spends in a year, I don't see how useful that is to the reader. LibStar (talk) 11:32, 28 November 2013 (UTC).
- No, the spikes are not an artefact of the graphing method. The y-axis (and x-axis) scaling is very standard to properly utilize the area of the graph, in fact I have not touched that aspect of the gnuplot defaults. There is no "exaggeration". Regarding explanation, I believe the caption is sufficient for a reader to understand what this graphic is, and this will automatically give them a good understanding of how much trade there really was/is - if it's less than your millionaire or not... that's good to know. If a particular feature would benefit from extra explanation, then secondary sources will eventually explain it, I have not looked into that, but on a wiki we never expect one person to do everything. Meanwhile, I am busy preparing a batch upload for a GLAM partner, so if you're in a pull-your-weight mentality, don't worry, I do. --99of9 (talk) 12:31, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
- the spikes can be exaggerated with the selection of y axis. You see that when companies or sales people want to exaggerate growth. You suggest " Maybe editors could even develop further text around the real-world events". 99of9 has inserted at least 30 of these graphs with zero attempt to explain what is going on and when countries do less trade than what a multimillionaire spends in a year, I don't see how useful that is to the reader. LibStar (talk) 11:32, 28 November 2013 (UTC).
There is definitely exaggeration on the Trinidadian graph, it looks like a massive spike. This is a particular issue when trade hovers $1-2 M a month. But why not introduce monthly share value data, it's 1. Publicly available and 2. Has to be useful to the reader right?3. Enriches the article? LibStar (talk) 12:45, 28 November 2013 (UTC) While we're at it, why doesn't Consumer_price_index_by_country#Australia have this time series data? LibStar (talk) 12:49, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
- LibStar, if you want to add a graph of Australian CPI to a relevant article, go ahead; but this is not a discussion about CPI. Do you have any other comments which are actually about trade graphs? bobrayner (talk) 13:29, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
- you yourself said "I like the data-rich approach. It would make a refreshing change on articles which are otherwise quite offputting to the average reader". So testing if these arguments have wider application. What makes these trade graphs so special? LibStar (talk) 13:48, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
- There's nothing particularly special about these trade graphs. It would make a refreshing change on articles which are otherwise quite offputting to the average reader. Are we agreed, then? bobrayner (talk) 15:27, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
- The only thing we agree on is there is nothing special about these graphs. I strongly disagree with their inclusion. LibStar (talk) 13:10, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
- We already knew that you disagree with their inclusion. This section was to get third opinions. With User:bobrayner and User:Canley (opinion) agreeing with inclusion, I'll take that as consensus unless others weigh in. --99of9 (talk) 05:33, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
- The only thing we agree on is there is nothing special about these graphs. I strongly disagree with their inclusion. LibStar (talk) 13:10, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
- There's nothing particularly special about these trade graphs. It would make a refreshing change on articles which are otherwise quite offputting to the average reader. Are we agreed, then? bobrayner (talk) 15:27, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
- you yourself said "I like the data-rich approach. It would make a refreshing change on articles which are otherwise quite offputting to the average reader". So testing if these arguments have wider application. What makes these trade graphs so special? LibStar (talk) 13:48, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
Bhutan - Pakistan relations, third opinion requested
Please can we have a third opinion at Talk:Bhutan–Pakistan_relations on whether to include Bhutan's early (either the first or second country in the world) recognition of Bangladesh (previously East Pakistan) as independent of Pakistan. --99of9 (talk) 10:24, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
Help needed—article transformation on U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East
I recently discovered a page called "U.S. interventions in the Middle East," which is relatively unchanged since it was created by a single author in 2007. The page, in my view, was very narrowly focused with an implicit POV that distorts a neutral, comprehensive account of American foreign policy in the Middle East. Thus, I have moved the page to United States foreign policy in the Middle East, made a few changes, and added several WikiProjects onto the talk page. I encourage members of this project to assist me in transforming the article—by increasing its scope to give an overall historical picture of American Middle East policy. --Jprg1966 (talk) 20:49, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
- Alternatively, we could simply delete the page and merge its contents where necessary. I don't see other examples of regional foreign policies—only bilateral relations. --Jprg1966 (talk) 20:56, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Archived some threads
I've archived some inactive threads to subsections which were notifications about discussions that have since been closed. — Cirt (talk) 06:43, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Bilateral relations article proliferation
Many years ago, we had a user create a crapload of bilateral relations articles, a massive increase in fodder for the most part. Last year, I noticed what seemed to me like repeat business at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Plumoyr/Archive#23_April_2013, but others judged it to be just a Filipino user doing the same. Today I noticed a Bangladeshi user doing that: Nomian (talk · contribs). I wonder if we're doing something wrong, something that provokes these awkward... binges of bilateralism. :) --Joy [shallot] (talk) 23:01, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
- the difference is Nomian (talk · contribs) actually provides some (but a small number of) sources. Although I am concerned about a wild spree of creating stubs and then walking away and never touching it again. the time could be better spent building up existing stubs LibStar (talk) 23:10, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
- I am concerned that some people might see it as an easy way to up their article count - like mass-produced articles on villages in some gazetteer - without actually building quality content or establishing notability. bobrayner (talk) 00:28, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
- agree with Bob. there are currently about 3 active users who are going on a bilateral articles stub spree. the common thing is that they never work on it again after the day they created it. LibStar (talk) 02:37, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
- I'm a student of international relations and this is my area of interest, so I'm mostly creating this sort of articles. Nomian (talk) 19:11, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
- agree with Bob. there are currently about 3 active users who are going on a bilateral articles stub spree. the common thing is that they never work on it again after the day they created it. LibStar (talk) 02:37, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
- I am concerned that some people might see it as an easy way to up their article count - like mass-produced articles on villages in some gazetteer - without actually building quality content or establishing notability. bobrayner (talk) 00:28, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Popular pages tool update
As of January, the popular pages tool has moved from the Toolserver to Wikimedia Tool Labs. The code has changed significantly from the Toolserver version, but users should notice few differences. Please take a moment to look over your project's list for any anomalies, such as pages that you expect to see that are missing or pages that seem to have more views than expected. Note that unlike other tools, this tool aggregates all views from redirects, which means it will typically have higher numbers. (For January 2014 specifically, 35 hours of data is missing from the WMF data, which was approximated from other dates. For most articles, this should yield a more accurate number. However, a few articles, like ones featured on the Main Page, may be off).
Web tools, to replace the ones at tools:~alexz/pop, will become available over the next few weeks at toollabs:popularpages. All of the historical data (back to July 2009 for some projects) has been copied over. The tool to view historical data is currently partially available (assessment data and a few projects may not be available at the moment). The tool to add new projects to the bot's list is also available now (editing the configuration of current projects coming soon). Unlike the previous tool, all changes will be effective immediately. OAuth is used to authenticate users, allowing only regular users to make changes to prevent abuse. A visible history of configuration additions and changes is coming soon. Once tools become fully available, their toolserver versions will redirect to Labs.
If you have any questions, want to report any bugs, or there are any features you would like to see that aren't currently available on the Toolserver tools, see the updated FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Mr.Z-bot (talk) (for Mr.Z-man) 05:11, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
The usage and scope of Declaration of Independence (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) is under discussion, see Talk:United States Declaration of Independence -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 06:10, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
CfD discussion for societies and cultures
There is a discussion going on right now at WP:Categories for discussion that involves changing the category names for all cultures, from, for example, "Afghan society" to "Society of Afghanistan". I can see that next will be changing "German culture" to "Culture of Germany" and the like. This would be for all ethnicities, nationalities and cultures.
If you would like to weigh in, the conversation is occurring at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 March 27#Society by country.Liz Read! Talk! 14:57, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
Help with an article?
I had a page (Etel Solingen) come up for speedy deletion, but I ended up declining it because there was an assertion of notability and the rationale didn't entirely fit our guidelines for deletion. There is an assertion of notability here, but the article history also shows that there is a good chance that it will be used for promotional purposes. I've found enough to establish notability but it really does need someone that is more familiar with IR to come in and edit. Even if you're not really interested in fleshing it out, I'd also appreciate some more eyes on the page to ensure that more WP:PUFFERY isn't added in the future. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:14, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
WP:FRINGE and self-declared countries
Is there a way of dealing with users pushing a WP:FRINGE agenda of a little-known, non-notable self-declared country? Special:Contributions/Mountstella has added mentions to multiple articles about the so-called "Kingdom of Colonia St John", using the alleged kingdom's official website as a citation. --benlisquareT•C•E 14:24, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
- Well, that site obviously isn't a reliable source. bobrayner (talk) 18:59, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello international experts! Is this old abandoned Afc submission about a notable topic? Should it be improved rather than deleted as a stale draft? —Anne Delong (talk) 18:10, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
- It's in mainspace now. —Anne Delong (talk) 19:01, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Dear diplomacy experts: This old abandoned Afc submission will soon be deleted as a stale draft. Is this a notable subject, and should the article be kept and improved instead? —Anne Delong (talk) 14:26, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
- From the lack of response I presume that this is a non-notable person, so I will let it go. —Anne Delong (talk) 19:04, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
A discussion has begun in order to gain a consensus on whether to include or exclude material involving the CIA and weapons smuggling in the article. Please weigh in on the discussion at the talk page. This may also be a good time to reassess the rating on the article. Thank you.--Maleko Mela (talk) 22:02, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
Invitation to User Study
Would you be interested in participating in a user study? We are a team at University of Washington studying methods for finding collaborators within a Wikipedia community. We are looking for volunteers to evaluate a new visualization tool. All you need to do is to prepare for your laptop/desktop, web camera, and speaker for video communication with Google Hangout. We will provide you with a Amazon gift card in appreciation of your time and participation. For more information about this study, please visit our wiki page (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Finding_a_Collaborator). If you would like to participate in our user study, please send me a message at Wkmaster (talk) 23:08, 7 May 2014 (UTC).
Nationalism vs pan-nationalism
Some extra opinions are needed at Template_talk:Pan-nationalist_concepts. Avpop (talk) 13:00, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Discussion at Talk:List_of_organizations_opposing_human_trafficking
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List_of_organizations_opposing_human_trafficking. A move request of interest to editors of this article. Thanks. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 17:29, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Leaflet For Wikiproject International Relations At Wikimania 2014
Hi all,
My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.
One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.
This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:
• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film
• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.
• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.
• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____
• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost
For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:
Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 12:17, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
Jordanian ambassador to Libya kidnapped (old news)
Here is some news:
- "Jordan’s ambassador to Libya kidnapped" (Archive). Al Arabiya. Tuesday, 15 April 2014.
Old news, but it may be a good source WhisperToMe (talk) 13:13, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
3,500+ AusAID photos now available for usage on content
Hi all, after my request the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade have kindly relicenced their Flickr stream to CC-BY. There are now over 3,500 images on Commons available and these are available at C:Category:Photographs from the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade Flickr stream. Please make full use of these images in content. Cheers, 222.155.158.114 (talk) 09:52, 27 June 2014 (UTC) (User:Russavia)
Occupation of Southern Slovakia
Hello!
I've just raised some issues on the talk page of the Occupation of Southern Slovakia article. I'd be happy if you could share your views and help to solve the issues. Thank you! – Thehoboclown (talk) 13:36, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Peer review for Corfu Channel case
I have requested a formal peer review for Corfu Channel case, an International Court of Justice case. Please see the peer review page. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 01:12, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
Participants
Would it perhaps be more logical to have the participants in the WikiProject listed alphabetically? Csbisbee (talk) 21:38, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
How do I ask for help here? (Article Pariah state needs help)
I am trying to help an article called Pariah state, and as you can imagine, it has come down to a list of states everyone wants to add. I think the article needs to focus on the lack of international consensus and the term's current (often convenient and pejorative) usage, and not depend on a list of current pariah states beyond a few examples of nations that have at some time satisfied some of the various criteria. I have begun a rewrite, just after the article emerged from an AfD discussion ending in no consensus. I believe it can and should be saved, but that it also needs help from someone besides me. Please have a look, maybe look over the talk page, and see if you can help! (And please, could someone tell me how to request help properly from a WikiProject like this one? Thanks!) Dcs002 (talk) 12:31, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
- It looks like we are actually making headway with this article now. I would still appreciate any input from Wikipedians who know about International Relations though. Dcs002 (talk) 08:51, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Empty relations articles?
I'm sure this was discussed in the past, but Groubani created a lot of empty articles about foreign relations between two countries. I just cleaned up the lead for Serbia–Slovenia relations. There's nothing usable in the article, save for a mention of embassies. Enigmamsg 21:30, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
- Looks like Groubani was part of a sock farm. The whole farm was at work doing this. Enigmamsg 21:45, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Is this page notable anymore? EU and the United States sanctioned 200+ individuals from Belarus in 2011 or 2012. But it's not big news. What's the point of the existence of the list in contrast to Belarus sanctions? --George Ho (talk) 02:25, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
- put it up for AfD if you don't think it's not notable. LibStar (talk) 23:08, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
- Are you going to support the existence of the list? --George Ho (talk) 08:33, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
- Please revisit the notability guidelines. Notability is not temporary so an article can't be "not notable anymore". Furthermore, the (non)-existence of a Belarus sanctioned individuals article has no consequences for the notability of the Ukraine sanctioned individuals article, because notability is judged by individual merit. Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 18:10, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
- I don't know when the sanctions will be lifted. Individuals are targeted, but Russians may be smarter to evade sanctions and to make them less effective. --George Ho (talk) 04:15, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
- Please revisit the notability guidelines. Notability is not temporary so an article can't be "not notable anymore". Furthermore, the (non)-existence of a Belarus sanctioned individuals article has no consequences for the notability of the Ukraine sanctioned individuals article, because notability is judged by individual merit. Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 18:10, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
- Are you going to support the existence of the list? --George Ho (talk) 08:33, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
- put it up for AfD if you don't think it's not notable. LibStar (talk) 23:08, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
RFC: Ethnic minorities in the Philippines and Vietnam
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Territorial disputes in the South China Sea#Request for comment. Thanks. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:16, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Comment on the WikiProject X proposal
Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
I've suggested turning this redirect into an article on the rivalry between Serbia and Albania, see Talk:Serbia v Albania -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 04:33, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Page Move
Please comment on Talk:Drone attacks in Pakistan. Uhlan talk 06:59, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
3rd opinion required: Ambassador names in bilateral articles
Could we please have some extra opinions on this? Can we include/remove (cited) non-notable ambassador names in bilateral articles? (@LibStar:) It seems to me that removing sourced content that is clearly relevant to the topic of the article is against our interests. The argument that it depends on the notability of the ambassador seems orthogonal to WP:N to me: notability is required for entire pages, not the subject of every sentence. If the (unstated) concern is about overwhelming the pages with content, I don't think we're anywhere near that point yet, but if we get there, we can always carve off a list, as has been done here and here for our only GA-rated bilateral article. --99of9 (talk) 12:56, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
- there are hundreds if not thousands of bilateral articles out there, the established practice is not to name ambassadors unless notable or they have been involved in a significant event between the countries. What next? Do we include names of consuls, and previous ambassadors? You can easily get a citation for almost all current ambassadors , but to me that doesn't warrant inclusion. LibStar (talk) 13:05, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
- The number of articles is irrelevant. The question is whether each of these articles would be improved with this information. Since an ambassador is tasked with making the bilateral relations happen, then the answer is yes - this is usually a key person in the discussion of the relations. Previous ambassadors are also fair game, as the list articles suggest, (especially if they played an important role in the relations). Your argument from "established practice" has little weight with me (unless it has been discussed before), especially if you enforce it by deleting other contributions of the same type. (And following that argument further down the rabbit-hole: If I find other examples of named non-notable ambassadors, is that enough to overturn your assertion that it is established practice not to name them?) --99of9 (talk) 13:18, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
- I haven't been systematically removing non notable ambassadors but the bilateral series of articles has had a pretty stable and established format for 5 years or longer. but I question they are usually a key person in all bilateral relations, for most ambassadors the only coverage you'll find is they've appointed to the role. And if they do play a key role, they usually warrant their own article. I've participated in over 100 ambassador AfDs so I can see how little coverage some ambassadors get. Foreign ministers play a far more significant role in bilateral relations. LibStar (talk) 13:24, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
- The number of articles is irrelevant. The question is whether each of these articles would be improved with this information. Since an ambassador is tasked with making the bilateral relations happen, then the answer is yes - this is usually a key person in the discussion of the relations. Previous ambassadors are also fair game, as the list articles suggest, (especially if they played an important role in the relations). Your argument from "established practice" has little weight with me (unless it has been discussed before), especially if you enforce it by deleting other contributions of the same type. (And following that argument further down the rabbit-hole: If I find other examples of named non-notable ambassadors, is that enough to overturn your assertion that it is established practice not to name them?) --99of9 (talk) 13:18, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
- there are hundreds if not thousands of bilateral articles out there, the established practice is not to name ambassadors unless notable or they have been involved in a significant event between the countries. What next? Do we include names of consuls, and previous ambassadors? You can easily get a citation for almost all current ambassadors , but to me that doesn't warrant inclusion. LibStar (talk) 13:05, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
WikiProject X is live!
Hello everyone!
You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!
Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.
Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Looking for feedback on my funding proposal to work with UNESCO
Hi all
I’m looking for feedback and endorsement for my Wikimedia Foundation PEG grant to be Wikimedian in Residence at UNESCO. I’d very much appreciate if you would have a look, I want to include as many different projects and languages as possible and connect editors in each country with local UNESCO partners. The most relevant goals to Wikipedia are:
- 1. Train UNESCO and its partner organisations to contribute to Wikimedia projects: Provide UNESCO and its partners with the skills, tools, resources and connections to contribute to Wikimedia projects in a meaningful, measurable and sustainable way. To integrate into the Wikimedia community both online and by matching them with local Wikimedia organisations and volunteers for in person support and collaboration. The project will create and improve content receiving 100,000,000 views per year on Wikimedia projects, educate 1000 people in over 200 organisations to learn more about Wikimedia projects. This will include 500 newly registered users trained to contribute to Wikimedia projects and 500 articles formally reviewed by experts.
- 2. Make content from the archives of UNESCO and its partners available on Wikimedia projects: This project will facilitate the upload of 30,000 images, audio files, videos, data and other content to Wikimedia projects from UNESCO archives (24,000 images), UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) and other sources including 10 organisations changing their content license to be Wikimedia compatible, a completed pilot project is outlined in the Goal section.
I ran a pilot project that resulted in the images found in the Wikimedia Commons category Images from the archive of UNESCO, here are a few examples relevant to Wikipedia:
-
The Soda volcano, Oromia, Ethiopia. -
Rubble of the cathedral after the earthquake that hit the Capital Port au Prince just before 5 pm on 12 January 2010. -
Young monk, wearing a special costume, July-August 1991, Sikkim, India. -
Sabha, 6, getting ready to walk to school from her house on the borders eastern Gaza strip, where she and her family are still living in tents. -
Not far from Mohenjo-Daro (or Mohenjodaro) - These Mohana fishermen/hunters use lures from real birds to catch more birds. They will either eat them or sell them. Mohenjodaro, Pakistan. -
Priest of rock-Hewn Churches of Lalibela, a high place of Ethiopian Christianity, still today a place of pilmigrage and devotion.
If you think this is a worthwhile project please click this link and then click the endorse button.
Many thanks
--Mrjohncummings (talk) 21:28, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Talk:War in Afghanistan (2001–14)#Propose merger
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:War in Afghanistan (2001–14)#Propose merger. Thanks. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:39, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Redirects from foreign relations of continents
Foreign relations of South America and Foreign relations of Asia are being discussed at RfD. Your input would be appreciated. --BDD (talk) 18:37, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
Afghan War move discussion
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:War in Afghanistan (1978–present)#Requested move 21 February 2015. Thanks. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 02:41, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Proposal To Condense Human Trafficking & Create A New Sex Trafficking Page
I am an undergraduate student at Rice University who would like to modify the existing sex trafficking portion of the "Human Trafficking" article in order to create a separate page for the topic. This article is currently extremely long and I feel this causes the topic of sex trafficking specifically to get lost in all the information. Sex trafficking is a global human rights issue and affects countless people, so I believe it deserves its own page due to its great importance and relevance to current human rights issues. There already exist pages focused on sex trafficking in particular countries so it seems that a parent article such as “Sex Trafficking” like I am proposing is necessary and would be beneficial to Wikipedia.
My revision to “Human Trafficking” will be focused on condensing the current sections on sex trafficking into one section that concisely summarizes the topic and provides a link to the new article I want to create, “Sex Trafficking.” I would pull from the current information on the topic and include it in this new page as well as add more content. For the “Sex Trafficking” article I will have the following sections – causes, prevalence, consequences to victims, children, governmental efforts and legislation, and nonprofit advocates.
If anyone has any comments or concerns, I would appreciate it if you to shared them with me. I am open to all suggestions. Does this proposal seem reasonable and something that would be beneficial to Wikipedia? Does anyone have an argument for why this new page should not be created? MBouchein (talk) 19:29, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Content of diplomatic mission article
I have a dispute with another editor over the appropriate content for an article about a former embassy: Embassy of the United States, Mogadishu. There are no Good or Featured articles about diplomatic missions, so I don't have any articles to refer to. If someone could look at the recent changes and provide an additional opinion on the content, it would be appreciated. AHeneen (talk) 21:55, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Discussion at Wikipedia talk:Notability (people)#Weak consensus for removal
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Notability (people)#Weak consensus for removal. Thanks. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:52, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
- Please comment on a proposed essay for diplomat notability.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 04:04, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
Hard Choices, new article about book on humanitarian intervention
I've created a new article about the book on humanitarian intervention, titled, Hard Choices: Moral Dilemmas in Humanitarian Intervention.
Help with suggesting additional secondary sources would be appreciated at the article's talk page, at Talk:Hard Choices (Moore book).
Thank you,
— Cirt (talk) 17:32, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2015 March 21#Category:War in Afghanistan (2001–14)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2015 March 21#Category:War in Afghanistan (2001–14). Thanks. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:30, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
This article has been at AfD for eight days with no input. The subject of the article is Chargé d’affaires ad interim at the U.S. Mission in Thailand. Comments from project participants would be welcome. Thank you. Jbh (talk) 16:58, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Input requested at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roman Vashchuk
There is some question how to assess coverage of an Ambassador for meeting GNG ie do things like interviews simply because they are the Ambassador count towards notability vs interviews because of who they are. Some input on how this is typically handled with respect to verifying notability would be appreciated. Thank you. JbhTalk 22:24, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Another AfD
Question at AfD if Ambassadors are inherently notable. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Margaret Adamson and User:LibStar#Apparently_some_people_still_think_ambassadors_are_inherently_notable.3F. Montanabw(talk) 04:46, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
- already been a lengthy discussion at Wikipedia talk:Notability (people). LibStar (talk) 09:04, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
International sanctions during the Ukrainian crisis
This article has now a "criticism" section that seems to me out of proportion, considering that there is no section on "support". Perhaps it may be of interest for someone here. I'm too busy with other things myself and not knowledgeable enough but thought I'd give you a notification. Yakikaki (talk) 06:35, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Iran crisis of 1946 listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Iran crisis of 1946 to be moved to Iran Crisis of 1946. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 22:46, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Kevin O'Malley listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Kevin O'Malley to be moved to Kevin F. O'Malley. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 23:20, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees to be moved to Convention relating to the Status of Refugees. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 07:45, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
"No man's land"
The usage and primary topic of "No man's land"/"No Man's Land" is under discussion, see talk:No man's land -- 70.51.202.183 (talk) 04:45, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
Discussions on bilateral relations
There are ongoing discussions at Wikipedia talk:Notability (bilateral relations) and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Notability (bilateral relations). Additional input would be welcomed. JbhTalk 17:56, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
"Esperanto"
The naming of Esperanto is under discussion, see talk:Latin for the discussion -- 67.70.32.20 (talk) 05:07, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
The relation of the Allies with Hungary at the Paris Peace conference
In the article Treaty of Trianon I found the text below:
The treaty was dictated by the Allies rather than negotiated and the Hungarians had no option but to accept its terms.[11] The Hungarian delegation signed the treaty under protest
Aren't the above facts self-implied? As far as I know, after any military conflict the winners dictate the terms of the peace treaties to the losers (and don't negotiate with the defeated sided when taking the decisions).
So, is it necessary to include the phrase above? Undecand (talk)
Change 'Foreign relations'
Shouldn't we change the Foreign relations pages (e.g. Foreign relations of Denmark to Bilateral relations of Denmark or Diplomatic relations of Denmark. I mean the word 'Foreign' just doesn't make sense it this context. --Ahmetyal (talk) 22:29, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
- That is what they are called. In this context 'Foreign' means foreign/external to the subject country. Both 'bilateral' and 'diplomatic' are not appropriate because they are restrictive definitions. For instance participation in NATO is not 'bilateral', nor is membership in the International Criminal Court. 'Diplomatic' is also not appropriate when talking about relations between countries which have no official diplomatic relations cf US - Iran relations since 1979. JbhTalk 23:37, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
- agree with Jbhunley. LibStar (talk) 23:48, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
- I do too. --99of9 (talk) 02:02, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
- I don't think the term needs to be changed. However, a compromise could be "International relations of [country]". That said, foreign relations is a common name and is appropriate to use in the title. AHeneen (talk) 17:23, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Dead diplomats category proposal
I realize we have a couple related to this already:
What I am wondering though, is if we have a method of categorization specifically for diplomats who died abroad, within the borders of the country for which they are acting as a diplomat within, as opposed to elsewhere.
For example, if a United States citizen was a diplomat to France, and died within France, for whatever reason. But not if he died within the United States or within Britain or something.
This could broadly contain any number of causes, like accident, disease, old age, as well as suicides or random non-assassination crime (like if a diplomat gets killed over a stolen wallet or in a bar fight over ogling a lady with a violent BF who doesn't know who the diplomat is, that might not qualify as assassination if they are not killed as a result of their occupation).
I'm not sure what to call such a category though. I think "Category:Diplomats who died abroad" is too inclusive since it would include that 'US diplomat to France dying in Scotland' situation that doesn't seem as relevant.
Trying to figure if there is a concise way to describe this. "Category:Diplomats who died on the job in their designated jurisdiction" maybe? I'm only interested in covering diplomats who die in active service and not say, a former diplomat and who died after retirement while not fulfilling their duties as diplomat. Ranze (talk) 18:23, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
RfC on Iran nuclear deal
See RfC here: talk:Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. Your input is appreciated! Iran nuclear weapons 2 (talk) 15:24, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
"Rest of the world"
The usage and topic of Rest of the world is under discussion, see talk:Rest of the world -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 05:32, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Deletion and Salting of Mass killings in capitalist regimes
This issue seems to me to be a very obvious violation of the Second Pillar. I am a little surprised that the prevailing Wikipedia culture isn't more politically acute and fair-minded. The matter is being appealed. Youknowwhatimsayin (talk) 17:16, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
I started a discussion about the current title; I invite you to comment. --George Ho (talk) 23:34, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
Please comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lithuanians in France (2nd nomination)
It has been open 22 days with only two !votes. JbhTalk 03:51, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Merger Proposal
I have proposed the merger of the articles List of military occupations with List of territorial disputes. You can join the discussion here.
Thanks for your participation. --Ravpapa (talk) 16:56, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!
Hello, |
Help with Colleen Bell?
Hello, I'm working on an article that should be of interest to this wikiproject: that of U.S. Ambassador to Hungary Colleen Bell.
Currently, I have an open request to replace the article's Political career section on the Talk page, which attempts to address content and naming issues. More specific to this project, the current section includes a brief, unsatisfactory summary of her ambassadorship, which only deals with the nomination process of her appointment. In fact, my next proposal for the article is to create an Ambassadorship section. My suggested version is available in the full proposed draft article in my user space. I'm looking for someone who would be willing to help me sort out these two sections.
As noted on the Colleen Bell Talk page, I have a financial conflict of interest: I am working on behalf of Ms. Bell through my firm, Beutler Ink, and SKD Knickerbocker. For this reason, I will not make any direct edits myself, and I'm looking for others' input and assistance in making the changes, if they seem reasonable. Thanks in advance, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 19:47, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
- @WWB Too: I'd be willing to help. I did a preliminary read-through of your draft, and I didn't see any significant WP:NPOV problems. I may have to look at it again more closely, but so long as it's properly sourced without any undue weight, I think an expansion on Ambassador Bell's activities during her tenure is acceptable. GabeIglesia (talk) 23:14, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
- @WWB Too: If you're still looking for more feedback, you may also want to reach out to WikiProject United States Government or the politician work group of WikiProject Biography, if you haven't already. GabeIglesia (talk) 23:19, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
- @GabeIglesia: Thanks for your response! I've had some assistance from two other editors implementing changes to other parts of the entry, but I've had the darndest time getting a response this time around. By all means, give the draft a close read; I'm open to making changes if you think any are necessary, and let me know if you're willing to make a full or partial replacement. Also, thanks for the wikiproject suggestions—if for any reason you have to step aside, I'll definitely go there next. Best, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 13:59, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
- Greetings GabeIglesia! I was wondering if you've had time to take a deeper look into my proposed updates to Colleen Bell? Please let me know, and I'm more than willing to answer any questions you might have. Best, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 14:35, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
- I did notice that the proposed language is pretty much already incorporated into the article though. The only differences I noticed are slight changes in tense/wording (e.g. "Bell has been active in advocacy and philanthropy" vs. "Bell is active in..." and then "Bell visited Washington, D.C. to lobby" vs. "Bell took action to combat global warming"). Can you clarify for me if these minor changes in tense are the ones you desire? Or if I'm incorrect, can you point me to which latest changes you wish to have reviewed? Thanks much. GabeIglesia (talk) 07:28, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
- Hi GabeIglesia! Indeed, another editor has incorporated my proposed edits already—with a few changes I think are just fine—so I'm closing out the request. Thanks so much for your interest in helping out! WWB Too (Talk · COI) 17:43, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
- No problem! Cheers, and happy holidays. GabeIglesia (talk) 06:49, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
List of Diplomatic Missions of Bangladesh
There is a note at the beginning of the page referred to above that the list requires better inline citations. Since I was employed by the Government of Bangladesh as a senior Civil Service Officer and recently retired after 31 years in service I could arrange for proper citations and links so that the page is more informative. However, unlike other pages to which I have made small or very minor edits, I would appreciate more input before touching anything on the page under discussion as it is a sensitive matter. Thanks.Abul Bakhtiar (talk) 08:44, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
Talk:List of state leaders in 2016#RfC: Inclusion of Palestine as a sub state of Israel
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List of state leaders in 2016#RfC: Inclusion of Palestine as a sub state of Israel. Could you please give your opinion on whether or not Palestine should be considered a separate sovereign entity from Israel? Many thanks Spirit Ethanol (talk) 18:55, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
RfC
Hello there! There's an ongoing RfC concerning Paul Singer and WP:NPOV in a broader sense, that you might care to comment on. Thank you, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 01:44, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
Crimea annexation RFC
I've opened an RFC on Talk: Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation on the question
"Should the information about opinion polls, currently in the subsection Crimean public opinion be moved into the subsection Crimean status referendum?"
As this page is of interest to WikiProject International relations, I thought I'd put a notice here. Kalidasa 777 (talk) 05:29, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
100% Shameless Canvassing
Trying to get a goon squad together to tackle war. The article is in shambles. It's rated high importance by this WikiProject, so I'm trying to get some goons. Please goon over and see if we can get something going. TimothyJosephWood 17:54, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
Lists of Ambassadors
Hello, I was wondering if there's a standard or preferred naming convention for list articles such as
- List of Ambassadors of Russia to Austria
- List of Australian ambassadors to Afghanistan
- List of Australian Ambassadors to Argentina
- List of Ambassadors from Austria-Hungary to the United Kingdom
- United States Ambassador to Austria
- Ambassador of Iceland to Austria
I'm doing some Red Link Recovery but not sure whether to rename the article, change the link or both. Suggestions welcome please. Certes (talk) 11:10, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
International reaction to the China v. Philippine arbitration case.
I and Toto11zi have a disagreement whether on how to tackle international reactions in the China v. Philippines case. It was agreed that countries would be group into two groups: "Support for the arbitration" and "Opposition against the arbitration / Support for bilateral talks among the parties involved". Reactions of multinational bodies like the Arab League and the European Union are separated from reactions of national governments. Toto11zi insists that all members of the Arab League should be included on the second group since the organization's secretary claim that it's member states supports China's stance. May we have some feedback on the article's talk page (where discussion about the dispute can also be read) regarding on how to handle the dispute. Thanks.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 18:38, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
Auto-assessment of article classes
Following a recent discussion at WP:VPR, there is consensus for an opt-in bot task that automatically assesses the class of articles based on classes listed for other project templates on the same page. In other words, if WikiProject A has evaluated an article to be C-class and WikiProject B hasn't evaluated the article at all, such a bot task would automatically evaluate the article as C-class for WikiProject B.
If you think auto-assessment might benefit this project, consider discussing it with other members here. For more information or to request an auto-assessment run, please visit User:BU RoBOT/autoassess. This is a one-time message to alert projects with over 1,000 unassessed articles to this possibility. ~ RobTalk 22:31, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Merger discussion for Group of Seven (G7)
An article that you have been involved in editing—Group of Seven (G7) —has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 06:27, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Discussion of interest
There is a discussion at Talk:Foreign relations of the United States#Importance assessments out of wack which concerns your project. –Compassionate727 (T·C) 23:48, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
International schools (especially those sponsored by embassies) on bilaterial relations pages
Discussion copied from User talk:Geopolitixx
Hi! I would like to comment on this edit.
International schools are always relevant to bilaterial relationship articles, and they are especially so if the international school in question is operated by/affiliated with a country's embassy (as is the case of the Indian School in Tehran, Iran). These international schools in general have children of diplomats as their students (as well as children of multinational employees and the like, and sometimes elites of the host countries). By any standards that is clearly relevant to bilateral relationship articles.
When the British School of Tehran closed that was a major event in UK-Iran relations for example. WhisperToMe (talk) 09:01, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
- The US-India relations page, for example, has no such mention due to the fact that they do not have a DIRECT or Major bearing on foreign relations. The closure of the British school in Tehran is another case altogether- it was symptomatic of deteriorating relations between the two nations and therefore worth a mention. Thanks. Geopolitixx (talk) 09:15, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
- @Geopolitixx: I think it is incorrect to say that they don't have a "DIRECT" or major bearing, precisely because these schools are sensitive in many ways (some are quite security conscious) and because they are chosen by foreign diplomats (the ones who make the policies) to educate their children. Remember that host country elites often go to the same schools.
- I believe the India-US relations page should include all American international schools such as the American Embassy School in Delhi (there are no Indian international schools in existence in the U.S.)
- @WhisperToMe: They may be 'sensitive' or they may be chosen by diplomats for their children, but i fail to understand why such schools are important enough to be mentioned in an article that should explain Bilateral Relations between 2 countries. They are just schools after all- set up for the convenience of diplomats and their families. Geopolitixx (talk) 13:06, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
- @Geopolitixx: I don't think the foreign affairs ministries see them as "just schools" - they are a way to spread the goals and values of their home countries. For example the Colegio Americano de Quito was set up in the 1940s partly so the U.S. could combat influence from Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy in Ecuador (As stated by a New York Times article - I have a full copy of this article which says: "There have been German and Italian schools for many years, and since the rise of Hitler and Mussolini they have been heavily subsidized to keep their own nationals in step with their totalitarian doctrines and to spread them among the Ecuadorian students." and there's more details about the American school). WhisperToMe (talk) 20:41, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Bilateral articles and listing of diplomatic missions
as many of you may know, I have been involved with bilateral articles for some time. Here is a question I'm putting out for community view. There is a long standing practice that the opening intro paragraph includes a line such as "Country X has an embassy in the capital of Country Y and vice versa." At least 2 editors are trying to create a separate "Diplomatic missions" section and list these embassies/separately. Is there a view on how we should present this? thanks. LibStar (talk) 00:52, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Looking for feedback on a tool on Visual Editor to add open license text from other sources
Hi all
I'm designing a tool for Visual Editor to make it easy for people to add open license text from other sources, there are a huge number of open license sources compatible with Wikipedia including around 9000 journals. I can see a very large opportunity to easily create a high volume of good quality articles quickly. I have done a small project with open license text from UNESCO as a proof of concept, any thoughts, feedback or endorsements (on the Meta page) would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks
--John Cummings (talk) 14:51, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
There's a discussion ongoing at International reactions to the 2016 Turkish coup d'état attempt about whether foreign reactions to an event are always notable. Might be of interest? —Brigade Piron (talk) 15:00, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
GA Reassessment of Hina Rabbani Khar
Hina Rabbani Khar, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:46, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
X–Y relations refers to the bilateral relations between X and Y
Hi. I recently made an edit to avoid the above construct in the opening of an article, but was reverted by LibStar, with the reason that it was "standard for bilateral relations". Now I realise that this construct is commonly used in bilateral relations articles, but such language is awkward and is actually warned against by the MOS (see WP:BOLDAVOID, with examples at WP:BOLDITIS). Has there actually been discussion that established consensus for the use of such openings in international relations articles? --Paul_012 (talk) 14:26, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
- MOS:BOLDTITLE is so ubiquitous it's almost policy. I don't agree with the essay you cite but I see what you mean about BOLDAVOID. Raise the issue at the talk page for Manual of Style if you want to gauge consensus. Chris Troutman (talk) 14:54, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
- WP:BOLDITIS is an essay. As Chris said you'll need to gain consensus for this . LibStar (talk) 15:06, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
Chris troutman, LibStar, I asked at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Lead section, and most replies seem to agree with my concerns. Do you think consensus is clear enough, or should I open a formal RfC at the village pump? --Paul_012 (talk) 08:49, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
- @Paul 012: I'll accept consensus is for the un-bolded sentence format rather than the use of
"refers to"
although I really don't agree. (An article without the bolded title in the lede sticks out like an article without an infobox.) I think because it's running contrary to standard other editors will notice and bring it up. You may need to pursue an RfC in the future, especially if you're contemplating changing every article in the WikiProject. Chris Troutman (talk) 13:27, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
Notice to participants at this page about adminship
Many participants here create a lot of content, may have to evaluate whether or not a subject is notable, decide if content complies with BLP policy, and much more. Well, these are just some of the skills considered at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship.
So, please consider taking a look at and watchlisting this page:
You could be very helpful in evaluating potential candidates, and even finding out if you would be a suitable RfA candidate.
Many thanks and best wishes,
Anna Frodesiak (talk) 17:46, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello. I'm working on this article. I would appreciate all your help, so I'm inviting to contribute to that page. Thank you. --George Ho (talk) 10:04, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
2016 Community Wishlist Survey Proposal to Revive Popular Pages
Greetings WikiProject International relations/Archive 5 Members!
This is a one-time-only message to inform you about a technical proposal to revive your Popular Pages list in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:
If the above proposal gets in the Top 10 based on the votes, there is a high likelihood of this bot being restored so your project will again see monthly updates of popular pages.
Further, there are over 260 proposals in all to review and vote for, across many aspects of wikis.
Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.
Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 18:02, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Merger proposal notification
There is a merger proposal for: Democratic National Committee cyber attacks to be merged ---> into Russian influence on the 2016 United States presidential election.
Discussion is at: Talk:Russian_influence_on_the_2016_United_States_presidential_election#Merger_proposal. Sagecandor (talk) 20:42, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
Fake news website - move discussion
Article is Fake news website.
- Requested move discussion at: Talk:Fake_news_website#Requested_move_7_December_2016. Sagecandor (talk) 13:11, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
Missing topics list
My list of missing topics about diplomacy is updated - Skysmith (talk) 13:25, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
RfC on first sentence of bilateral relations articles
There is an RfC on the formatting of the first sentence of bilateral relations articles at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#RfC: First sentence of bilateral relations articles. As previously raised, the "X–Y relations refers to bilateral relations between X and Y..." construct is not in compliance with the Manual of Style. Please consider voicing your opinions there. Thank you. --Paul_012 (talk) 04:06, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Cold War II#RfC: "Novel risks and measures for preventing escalation" section
Hello, I'd like to ask you to share your thoughts about whether or not the section "Novel risks and measures for preventing escalation" of the article Cold War II should be removed or not.
Please comment on its talk page (within the next 3 days if possible).
--Fixuture (talk) 14:31, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
New article: International Boundary Commission
I have just created a new article titled International Boundary Commission, about the commission that maintains boundary markers on the boundary between the United States and Canada. It could use more work. In particular, perhaps some additional other articles should link to it. Michael Hardy (talk) 18:59, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
Confusion between G7 and G8
The articles on Group of Seven and Group of Eight do not explain the difference between the groups. A merger of the two articles was proposed in 2014 but rejected because the two were deemed to be different. However what that difference is was not explained in either article. Somebody who understands the difference needs to edit both articles to clarify and provide appropriate links between the two. --Agrestis (talk) 09:26, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted RfC discussion at Talk:International Justice Mission
I invite you to comment on the content at Talk:International Justice Mission#Request for comment on placement of criticism, which is recently relisted. --George Ho (talk) 18:26, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Amb. Robert A. Mandell
Hello, WPFR! I've posted an edit request for assistance on the Robert A. Mandell article, and I am hoping someone from this project can help out. The current article on the former ambassador to Luxembourg is fairly short and a bit haphazard. My draft expands on Mr. Mandell's life, career, and ambassadorship, while cleaning up existing content, and overall I believe is a better Wikipedia article. I'm here asking for another editor to review and consider implementing it is because I am working on behalf of Mr. Mandell, as I've disclosed on the article's discussion page. Please let me know if you have any questions at all. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 13:48, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Popular pages report
We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, Community Tech bot will post at Wikipedia:WikiProject International relations/Archive 5/Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of WikiProject International relations.
We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:
- The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
- The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
- The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).
We're grateful to Mr.Z-man for his original Mr.Z-bot, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of WikiProject International relations, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.
Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:16, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
Foundations of Geopolitics
The book and by extension the wikipedia page for it, is getting quite a bit of attention lately. However, I realized that the article is almost entirely derived from a review on a site that doesn't look reliable.
Harizotoh9 (talk) 17:22, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
Soliciting comments on Russo-Georgian War
I have started a RfC [1] on a certain contentious statement in this article, please help resolve the dispute. I should say that the article is under discretionary sanctions - edit carefully! Banedon (talk) 00:58, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
Request for Comments: United Nations Ocean Conference nomination for In the news
United Nations Ocean Conference has been nominated for In the news here.
You can participate in the discussion. If you would like to do so please leave a comment there as soon as possible as it will be closed or simply be inappropriate for ITN later.
--Fixuture (talk) 18:33, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
Nomination of The Plot to Hack America for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Plot to Hack America is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Plot to Hack America until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Sagecandor (talk) 17:55, 12 June 2017 (UTC)