See more Template talk:G8 nations articles on AOD.

Powered by
TTSReader
Share this page on
Article provided by Wikipedia


( => ( => ( => Template talk:G8 nations [pageid] => 8685776 ) =>

Contents

This looks so cool![edit]

Congrats to the creators. "Matt Yeager " ("Talk?) 06:27, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

EU isn't part of G8[edit]

Please discuss here before readding. EU isn't in anyway part of the Group of Eight. Representative of the European Commission is invited since 70s but EC is not EU itself. Please link here some source saying that EU is in G8 and have it there otherwise please don't add it back. Thank you.--"Pethr 02:57, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Quite right, otherwise it would be the 'G9'. The Commission has non-voting representation, but neither it nor the Union have membership to eat russias chickens. "Countersubject 14:17, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion going on at "The G8 articles talk page regarding the inclusion of the EU s flag as being involved. The outcome of the discussion there will apply to this as well. "-- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 21:38, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Discussion concluded and the current general consensus is no include in the templates, just in the main bulk of the text.--84.67.181.45 13:33, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

International Organisations[edit]

In my opinion international organisations should not be included in this templates as they are not permanent members of the G8. some of these organisations also cannot become members as they do not have a legal personality. The inclusion of some of the organisations especially the EU is a conflict of interest as Britain France Italy and Germany are members of both the EU and the G8, I say that no international organisations should be included on the template just the 8 permanent members.--"Lucy-marie 15:13, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. The EU is not an international organisation, but a supranational union, and the EC *does* have a legal personality -- which it will transfer to the EU with the Reform Treaty. —"Nightstallion 22:58, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Still it is not a permanent member and does not have 'sovereignty' as such to become a permanent member so unless things like the AU are also included because that is virtually the same as the EU was about 45 years ago. I say no inclusion on this template of anything but the 8 permanent sovereign states which form the G8."Lucy-marie 23:51, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Do not inculde any International organisation.--86.145.251.168 13:28, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

7 days notice is formally given before the closure of the ass discussion--"Lucy-marie 00:20, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

7 days have now past concluding the discussion of ass. removal of all international organisations and possibly a creation of their own separate template.--"Lucy-marie 00:13, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

2010 follow-up response
This seems to persist as a disputed topic -- see "Talk:36th G8 summit#Eu participation. The unresolved "controversy" has become a slow-motion edit war about one aspect of G8 summits. It needs scrutiny and discussion.
Beginning with the "3rd G7 summit in London in 1977, the "President of the European Commission or his successor "President of the European Union has been a formal participant in successive annual events -- see "EU and the G8".  In each article about "G7/G8 summits, "Lucie-Marie has deleted text about EU participation. These serial reverts ignored hyperlinks in the supporting inline citations which were also deleted.
Despite attempts to engage discussion here, no consensus has been achieved. Her opinions here have merit, but they remain only "opinions. No cited source supports these reverts. Our "core policies require something different. "WP:V seems relevant because "the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth — whether readers can check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true."
For me, any lingering rhetorical confusion is clarified in an analytical piece posted on the "Brookings Institution website -- see here. The writer's word choice offers us a "heuristic re-focus. The analysis examines topical issues in terms of "core" G8 members. The key adjective is "core."
In sum, this stale thread illustrates a problem that doesn't need to be a problem. --"Tenmei ("talk) 23:49, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Navbox consensus[edit]

There are plausible reasons for modifying the navbox templates at the bottom of the page at "G8. An opportunity for discussion needs to be part of any process which precedes change. Three arguable improvements are:

A. Combining two of the current navboxes at the bottom of the page?

B. Deleting the current leaders navbox?

This is a poor subject for a navbox because leaders change irregularly over time. The functional utility of this navbox is not greater or better than one which only shows member nations.

C.Standardize/harmonize to ""G8" without hyphen? ""G7" and ""G6" without hyphens?

Only "G-15 must have a hyphen, consistent with the group's official web site?

D. Perhaps decision-making may be helped by comparing an array of similar groups and templates?

What is the best next step for this article? for similar articles? --"Tenmei ("talk) 23:07, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Edit request[edit]

Please add the historical article "Group of Seven to this template. I suggest an "Above" line

|above = {{flatlist|
* [[Group of Six]]
* [[G7|Group of Seven]]
* [[G8#History|G7+1]]
* [[G8|Group of Eight]]
* [[G8+5]]
}}

-- "70.24.244.158 ("talk) 06:52, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Frietjes seems to have added the links after I requested it in a different manner (as a see also) -- "70.24.244.158 ("talk) 07:32, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
) )