Talk:Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Organizations (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Organizations. If you would like to participate please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Politics (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject East Asia (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject East Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of East Asia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

What does APEC do anyway???? What does it do??? What are some of the issues they talk about???[edit]

According to the Economist they don´t do anything: http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9788478 Perhaps this deserves mention in the article. --Cadentsoul (talk) 06:12, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Announcing Wikipedia:Indonesia-related topics notice board[edit]

After some thought and consideration, I created an Indonesia-related topics notice board, along the same lines as other regional notice boards (such as those for Malaysia and Africa). This was established to coordinate efforts to improve Indonesia-related Wikipedia entries. If you've made contributions to Indonesia-related articles in the past, or would like to, please take some time to visit, introduce yourself, and sign the roster.

Improvement Drive[edit]

The article on Brunei is currently listed to be improved on Wikipedia: This week's improvement drive. You can support the nomination with your vote there. --Fenice 06:36, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

Map[edit]

Although the current map is fine, it think it would be better if someone could come up with a map which had the Pacific Ocean as the central point rather than the traditional European map of the world. The current map makes the member states seem rather distant rather than as a proto-community.

Flag of the ROC[edit]

Which flat does Chinese Taipei, i.e. the delegation of the Republic of China, use for the APEC? — Instantnood 21:56, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

The Chinese Taipei flag? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.7.15.166 (talk) 00:35, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

2004 summit[edit]

Wasn't it held in Mexico, not Chile? KranskyKransky 05:26, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

achievement[edit]

photo shoots in traditional wear[edit]

The leaders often line up in the hosting countries dress wear for a photo op. can someone put some information about that in the artical--Reegan.milne 14:45, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Changes related to APEC97[edit]

I did some editing elsewhere related to APEC's 1997 meeting, and as a result I made some changes here. First, I added about five references to the APEC 1997 paragraph. That's a bit much for three sentences, but I think the controversy over Canada's police work at that APEC meeting is worth an article in itself some day, so I'm recording useful references here. Second, I moved the <references /> tag from the "Membership" section to a new "Notes and References" section at the bottom of the article. This is because there are now references later in the article than the original tag location, and they wouldn't show up unless I moved the tag. It might be worth changing the way the footnotes on China, Hong Kong and Taiwan in the Membership section are formatted to not use the "ref" tag. --Jdlh | Talk 17:07, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

APEC conventions prohibit the showing of flags[edit]

The discussion of APEC shows member flags along with their names. Becuase APEC is an international organization that includes Chinese Taipei as a member, APEC convention is to not display member flags, as this could be construed as representing individual countries. Although colorful, I suggest the flags should be eliminated from the article. --AG123 08:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

APEC has its conventions. Wikipedia has its own. We do not call Taiwan "Chinese Taipei" as this violates the principle of self-identification. Flags are used in other articles, so why not here? Kransky 10:06, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
The point is to understand APEC conventions, not Wikepedia conventions. APEC is the the only major international organizaton that has Chinese Taipei as a member. But to obtain member approval for Chinese Taipei participation in APEC, APEC had to develop certain conventions, such as not using the word "country" or showing flags. This convention is important to understanding how APEC operates. AG123 01:20, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Keating?[edit]

History section should mention Paul Keating who was Australian PM at first APEC meeting and who was a driving force behind its development.--Jack Upland 06:37, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Strictly speaking the first APEC meeting was in 1989 when Hawke was PM. Keating did have much to contribute, but this happened later. Kransky 10:03, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Then this should be mentioned. Hawke was the PM, but wasn't it Keating's idea? He claims it was. I don't know enough about it to say, but someone should. --BrianFG 20:50, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Controversy[edit]

There seems to be a few protests centred around APEC. I came here looking for information and turned up empty-handed. Could someone elaborate? Ratznium 09:08, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Sydney 2007 will be the only APEC meeting with protests (planned), aside from Vancouver. Clinton wasn't much of a target in 1993 in Seattle, and I have not otherwise heard of protests in Latin America or Asia. The protests in Sydney I gather are not anti-APEC, but are focussed more on the leaders of the US, Australia and China. I strongly suggest incidents pertaining only to the Sydney meeting go in APEC Australia 2007 and not here. Kransky 10:01, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes the protests weren't anti-APEC per se. They were mainly directed against China and Vietnam on human rights issues, the US over Iraq and Australia, the US, China and Japan over climate change. There's a little bit of detail in the article Kransky mentioned, but not much. --BrianFG 20:53, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Sections Removed?[edit]

I think its note worthy that George bush is staying at the Intercontinental Hotel, and has put satellite dishes on the roof. Also what about the giant fence? I suspect some heavy editing of this page is going on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.173.0.73 (talk) 08:37, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Such details should go on the article specific to the Sydney meeting, not this article. Would you expect the Olympic Games article to discuss minor issues that arose at every single game?Kransky 12:41, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Its very relevant, at least to explain more on why and when there have been controversy surrounding the forum. Other wise it paints a bias view.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.237.176.253 (talk) 11:07, 17 June 2008 (UTC)


EURASIA[edit]

As an answer to APEC where neither Europe nor India participate there should be an annual EURASIAN answer with the participation of just four countries or entities: EUROPEAN UNION, RUSSIA, CHINA and INDIA.

It is not necessary to think about more: just with those FOUR it would be enough to negotiate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.35.183.44 (talk) 18:26, 31 July 2008 (UTC)


ariibando el mundo[[Media:dentro de ty como explicartelo]][edit]

Which map?[edit]

I just uploaded a new map to Commons which I think would better suit the article.

As you can see, the current map is centred at 0 degrees but the proposed, based on File:BlankMap-World-162E.svg, is at E162, which I think would be more fitting to an article discussing a group based in the Asia-Pacific region. I could also make a map centred at E180 (File:BlankMap-World-180E.svg). Any thoughts? Cflm001 (Talk) 04:05, 3 May 2009 (UTC)


2011 U.S. Summit in Honolulu[edit]

The best place for an APEC Summit in the U.S. would be Honolulu (Hawaii) as it is the closest American state to Asia.--81.32.120.227 (talk) 14:57, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership[edit]

Hi.Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership page was moved to a separate page. The agreement is an FTA and has nothing to do with APEC.

Navbox consensus[edit]

There are plausible reasons for modifying a navbox templates which does not appear at the bottom of the page at Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC). The template does appear at the bottom of the page for current leaders of each APEC member. An opportunity for discussion needs to be part of any process which precedes change.

A. The main navbox is very good: {{APEC}}—Template:Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation

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 "leaders" navbox is not greater or better than the main navbox which shows member nations and serial summits.

C. 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) 00:47, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

COLOMBIA AND NORTH KOREA The two important countries which are still left from APEC Summits are COLOMBIA and NORTH KOREA. COLOMBIA, with a population of almost 50 million people and an economy as large as South Africa´s, would be an important partner. Meanwhile, NORTH KOREA, with a populationof 25 million people and an strategic situation in the Sea of Japan, would be a key player.--83.54.107.14 (talk) 16:00, 22 April 2011 (UTC)