Talk:Commonwealth of Nations
|
|
| Missing image Cscr-featured.png Featured article star | Commonwealth of Nations is a featured article, which means it has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you see a way this page can be updated or improved without compromising previous work, feel free to contribute. |
Are the Pitcairn Islands part of the Commonwealth? Theanthrope 18:45 Apr 7, 2003 (UTC)
- They're a British overseas territory, so they're not members in their own right, but by virtue of the colonial power being a member. - Chrism 17:44, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Does anyone mind me adding Template:Commonwealth of Nations to the Commonwealth countries pages -- Chrism 17:44, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)
| Contents |
Israel
I'm not sure where else to ask this, so I'll ask here. Has Israel ever considered (or been offered) Commonwealth membership? It seems almost to fit (if oddly), given the British heritage (of sorts). -Penta 06:20, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- I don't think Israel has ever been interested, though I did see an article once (in the Economist, I think) which said the Palestinian Authority were interested in joining once they got control of their own land. -- Arwel 19:09, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Would Israel or the Palestinian Authority qualify? Surely they were never a colony as such, but a League of Nations Mandate which was simply allowed to expire.--garryq 17:09, 22 May 2004 (UTC)
See the list of members: "Mozambique (1995) (currently the only member never to have been part of the British Empire)"
Etc.
There's a lot of colons in this article (like in the paragraph about the 30% of the world's population, India and Tuvalu), and these look, well, odd in American english, but are they typical for British english? And since the Commonwealth is a chiefly British organization, it would seem more reasonable to keep them if the Brits use them. However, if not even the Brits use them, they should be cleaned up. --Golbez 15:14, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Would somebody please give context for the de Gaule suggestion? It's sorta irresponsible to give a tantalizing hint like that otherwise! Doops 18:53, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
It seems implausible that de Gaulle, who was always concerned with France's freedom of action, and always suspicious of England and the Commonwealth, would ever have suggested this. Perhaps some remark of his was misconstrued, or perhaps User:Jtdirl, who added this on 21:00, 3 Jan 2003, is pulling our legs. Unless I see good evidence, I plan to remove this remark in two weeks. --Macrakis 23:50, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
Colons should be semicolons.
Re: The colons.
In Britain, it's not normal to have that many colons used in that way. It looks like the author has been using colons where they should have used semicolons.
Hong Kong
Why is Hong Kong not on the list? The former British colony used to be a member of the Commonwealth until returning to China until 1997.
- Colonies are not "members" of the Commonwealth - only sovereign states can be members. Andrew Yong 00:50, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Sections
The "See Also" section has a link to a category (Category:Members of the Commonwealth of Nations, which is not very meaningful. Categories should be at the bottom of the article. This category also lists only a single member nation - I will remove it.
Also, I think the "List of members by continent" can be split to its own article, making this article flow better. The list of members has been provided in the template at the bottom, so this section is superfluous anyway. I will split it into its own article and link it from "See Also." --ashwatha 19:57, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
What is the problem with a republic?
The article refers several times to issues with members that become republics being ejected from the Commonwealth. It also says, though, that most members are republics. What is the problem with a member becoming a republic?
Lemuel 16:01, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)
There is actually contradictory information in the article. I suspect that the paragraph near the top is correct, i.e. that there is now no problem with a republic joining the Commonwealth provided they recognise the Queen as "Head of the Commonwealth" - a post which does not seem to impinge on national government at all. DJ Clayworth 21:48, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- No, it is not contradictory. By the rules, a nation ceases to be a member once it becomes a republic unless it gets the permission of other members to stay on. It is true that a majority of the members are republics - they have just received permission from other members, a precedent set by India in 1950. I agree that it is paradoxical, but there it is. The reason for the rule is that the organisation was originally meant to be for countries which recognized Queen Elizabeth as head of state. But 1950 onwards, colonialism became outdated, so members began to let other members stay after becoming republics. --ashwatha 03:04, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- OK, I'm starting to understand. However, do countries still lose their membership once they become a republic? The Commonwealth Timeline (http://www.thecommonwealth.org/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=140633) just says "London Declaration allows republics to retain membership, acknowledging the British Monarch as Head of the Commonwealth." It doesn't look like a country loses its membership per se, but just acknowledges the Monarch. --Beirne 04:00, Feb 2, 2005 (UTC)
- They still need the permission of other members. Without this formality their membership lapses - this happened in 1961 when South Africa became a republic and more recently in 1987 when the second Fijian coup overthrew the government and declared a republic. In contrast, the first coup had no effect on Fiji's membership, and the third coup only resulted in suspension from the Commonwealth.
- Suspension as an option only dates from the 1990s - previously the rule was non-interference in other members' internal affairs. If South Africa in 1961 had not required the other members' permission to become a republic, it could have remained in the Commonwealth indefinitely, since there was (and probably still is) no mechanism for expelling a country from the Commonwealth against its will. Andrew Yong 13:00, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Members of the Commonwealth of Nations
Surprisingly, I see that Category:Members of the Commonwealth of Nations only contains Pakistan. As I couldn't find it in this article, is there any other page where I can find a complete and exhaustive list of the participant States? Thanks! (If possible, could I receive an answer on my it.wiki name, as I don't regularly check my Discussion page on en.wiki? This is my italian Discussion page This is the en.wiki one: Giorgio. (Drop a note) I'm here (http://www.contradadellachiocciola.it/) 11:16, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC))
- There is a link in the article:
- 6 List of Commonwealth members
- See List of Commonwealth Members by continent -- ALoan (Talk) 23:08, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- 6 List of Commonwealth members
I'm starting a concerted effort to fill this category, especially as the Commonwealth template has, somewhat contreversially, been deleted from all the country pages. TreveXtalk 18:58, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
Map
Um, admittedly, geography is not my specialty, but there is something wrong with the map in the article. What is the "country" to the center-left? func(talk) 00:17, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- You'll have to be more specific. Guyana? Belize? Canada? Ddye 01:52, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Um, you're kidding, right? The left-most part of the map, (which is no where near Guyana, Belize, or Canada), shows this crazy bunch of lines in the middle of the pacific, where no crazy lines should be. The (whatever it is) can be seen almost touching Australia on the right side of the map. func(talk) 03:22, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Sorry, I was a little confused. Those lines are rather commonly used on maps show the general boundaries of states that are made up of multiple islands in the Pacific such, as Micronesia, Kiribati, Tuvalu, etc. Check out this link: [1] (http://go.hrw.com/atlas/norm_htm/oceania.htm). Ddye 03:43, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Vandalism
Do featured articles always have this much trouble? Twice since I logged on 10 minutes ago. Ddye 01:44, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Articles linked from the Main Page have a habit of being vandalized. -- AllyUnion (talk) 06:35, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Pictures
I still believe some pictures of the representatives would be suited for this article -- AllyUnion (talk) 06:36, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Furthermore, consumers in Commonwealth countries retain many preferences for goods from other members of the Commonwealth, so that even in the absence of tariff privileges, there continues to be more trade within the Commonwealth than might be predicted.
- On what basis is this predicted? Does this not then still constitute an economic bloc? - Centrx 08:00, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Ireland a republic in 1949 or 1937?
It says in the article that Ireland (the independent part) became a Republic in 1949. I thought that was in 1937 (after having been a separate monarchy since 1922).
- From Republic of Ireland - "On the 29 December 1937 a new constitution, the Constitution of Ireland, came into force. It replaced the Irish Free State by a new state called simply 'Ireland'. Though this state's constitutional structures provided for a President of Ireland instead of a king, it was not technically a republic. The principal key role possessed by a head of state, that of representing the state symbolically internationally remained vested in statute law in the King as an organ. On 1 April 1949 the Republic of Ireland Act declared a republic, with the functions previously given to the King given instead to the President of Ireland." -- KTC 13:09, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)