| Revision as of 05:01, 8 April 2007 editEd (talk | contribs)6,213 edits →Cool: re← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:07, 8 April 2007 edit undoPharos (talk | contribs)Administrators57,876 edits →Cool: clear up misunderstandingNext edit → | ||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
| ::So far as I can ascertain, those two countries do not maintain formal relations with each other. Why should we have an article for this and similar circumstances if they are inherently unmaintainable? Your suggestion is grossly overstated.--] | ] 04:55, 8 April 2007 (UTC) | ::So far as I can ascertain, those two countries do not maintain formal relations with each other. Why should we have an article for this and similar circumstances if they are inherently unmaintainable? Your suggestion is grossly overstated.--] | ] 04:55, 8 April 2007 (UTC) | ||
| :::What I meant by the statement I placed was to point out that we don't have the foreign policies of some small countries as detailed as we want them to be. I only meant to illustrate the lack of coverage among our political neighbors less covered by the media. However, this project is open to suggestions, and I would love to change the goals, scope, and guidelines if necessary.--''''']''''' <sup>]</sup> 05:01, 8 April 2007 (UTC) | :::What I meant by the statement I placed was to point out that we don't have the foreign policies of some small countries as detailed as we want them to be. I only meant to illustrate the lack of coverage among our political neighbors less covered by the media. However, this project is open to suggestions, and I would love to change the goals, scope, and guidelines if necessary.--''''']''''' <sup>]</sup> 05:01, 8 April 2007 (UTC) | ||
| :It appears there's been some misunderstanding of my statement. I think this is a great project, and hope to contribute to it in future. I was just pointing out that there's a lot of work ahead (FWIW, I do actually think that bilateral relations between any two UN members would be inherently notable, though obviously Andorra and Tuvalu would be a low priority).--] 05:07, 8 April 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 05:07, 8 April 2007
 | International relations Project‑class | ||||||
| |||||||
WP:NPOV
Please be aware that this project will likely necessitate extreme vigilance to maintain WP:NPOV standards. I applaud you effort, but advise extreme care and caution in your endeavor. Best of luck, and happy editing! SkipperClipper 03:51, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
original council proposal discussion for Foreign relations
- Description
- This WikiProject will aim to focus on articles that not much people really focus on. This Project will have 3 different kinds of articles under its scope: foreign relations, diplomats, and international meetings. Examples include, but are not limited to:
- Foreign relations - United States-Australia relations/Australia-New Zealand relations/Foreign relations of Azerbaijan
- Diplomats - Batyr Berdiyev/Hersey Kyota/Sayyid Faisal Bin Ali Bin Faisal Al-Said
- International Meetings - Millennium Summit/2005 World Summit/Shamrock Summit/Summit of the Americas
- Edits made to WP articles are heavily focused towards topics regarding the US, UK, and other major English-speaking countries here in the English WP. This project will focus on foreign relations between...let's say-Samoa and Palau. The project would attempt to create a centralized list of further branching list of all ambassadors from all countries. It would also attempt to create a detailed account of any international meetings, such as those listed above.
- I realize that most of this project's work would overlap into other WikiProjects. But an American Wikiproject can't possible form a United States-Australian relations without the assistance of the Australian Wikiproject! Therefore, I think that the Foreign relations WikiProject could also be a place where country-related Wikiprojects could meet together and discuss.--Ed 15:18, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
- Comments
- I like the idea. I wonder how it would relate to the proposed "Diplomatic Missions by Country" proposal higher on this page, though. John Carter 15:36, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- I like the broader scope of this Project, and believe it has more appeal than the abovementioned Diplomatic Missions by Country. In the long run, broader is better and stands a better chance of survival, given the inactive narrower projects. Chris 21:39, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Cool
Now we can start those 40,000 articles on bilateral relations!--Pharos 00:21, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
- I received an inquiry on my talk page, and yes, I'm quite serious about that figure, actually. With about 200 countries, and each state actor having a significant relationship with every other one, we really should ideally have 40,000 (200 x 200) individual articles on bilateral relations. Anyone care to get started on Andorra-Tuvalu relations?--Pharos 04:40, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
- It's not the figure I question, it's the tone and meaning of your statements. If you seek to mock, be clear. I am certain the creator of the project was using Samoa and Palau as illustrations, not literally. I would be very surprised, outside the G8, whether most smaller countries even have individual articles about relations with their own neighbors, unless there has been some conflict historically. If you have something constructive to say, be open. If you are just being ugly, that is unworthy of an admin. Chris 04:49, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
- So far as I can ascertain, those two countries do not maintain formal relations with each other. Why should we have an article for this and similar circumstances if they are inherently unmaintainable? Your suggestion is grossly overstated.--cj | talk 04:55, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
- What I meant by the statement I placed was to point out that we don't have the foreign policies of some small countries as detailed as we want them to be. I only meant to illustrate the lack of coverage among our political neighbors less covered by the media. However, this project is open to suggestions, and I would love to change the goals, scope, and guidelines if necessary.--Ed 05:01, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
- It appears there's been some misunderstanding of my statement. I think this is a great project, and hope to contribute to it in future. I was just pointing out that there's a lot of work ahead (FWIW, I do actually think that bilateral relations between any two UN members would be inherently notable, though obviously Andorra and Tuvalu would be a low priority).--Pharos 05:07, 8 April 2007 (UTC)