Talk:European Central Bank

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article European Central Bank has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
October 31, 2011 Good article nominee Listed
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject European Union (Rated GA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject European Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the European Union 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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Economics (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics 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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Finance (Rated GA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance 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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Germany (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany 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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Does this article still justify the good article assessment?[edit]

How can this be a good article if for starters the introduction (which has almost 600 words) doesn't have a single source citation?

Also the information regarding the selection process of the members of both the governing council and the executive board are poor. The governing council simply states that it's composed of the executive board plus the presidents of the national bank but fails to mention or provide link to anything about how the presidents of the national banks are selected. And the executive board just has a unclear citation (IE it mentions a council but doesn't specify which council, the governing council of the ECB? the European council?) with no source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JonyRijo (talkcontribs) 18:42, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Just one point: according to WP:CITELEAD the introduction does not necessarily require citations. If you look at the {{Citation needed (lead)}} template, you will see that it should be used only where the summary in the lead is not verified in the body. Citations are, of course, needed for direct quotations, contentious material, etc. Having said that, the lead is probably too long; in particular it has too many paragraphs. --Boson (talk) 18:59, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
As regards the points mentioned above, I'm not sure what can be said about the governors of the national banks, since each country is different. Perhaps requirements concerning independence of central banks should be mentioned.
Although there is a brief mention in the history section, there should, perhaps, be more discussion of the role of the governing council and the general council. The representation or non-representation of the major financial centres or the EU might not be clear to the inadvertent reader, which may be significant in the light of the increased role of the ECB. The boundary between history and news is fluid, but I'm not sure what the threshold is for inclusion in the history section. For instance, Stark's resignation gets a mention, but Draghi's promise to do everything it takes doesn't.
As it stands, I don't think that the article would survive a good article reassessment. I think it should be reviewed with the Good article criteria in mind. I see some problems with criteria 1a, 1b, and 3b.
I think the introduction should be edited to make it shorter and better conform to WP:LEAD. In particular, it should summarize the body of the article better. I would suggest four paragraphs:
  • Definition, salient data, incl. location
  • Organization
  • Powers and objectives, incl. independence
  • History
As regards the body:
  • This is an article about the institution, not recent events, so the text on the European sovereign debt crisis should be made significantly shorter and should be checked to ensure that it is a summary of the main article.
  • The other templated issues also need dealing with.
  • I think it could also do with a copy-edit to remove the odd style problem and to create a better flow (a general problem with collaborative editing). Longer paragraphs might help; some of it seems somewhat "bitty".
  • All in all, I think the time may be ripe for a general pruning, re-ordering and copy-edit.
--Boson (talk) 23:09, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
The article's lead is currently at 10 paragraphs, I have tagged it for cleanup. C679 18:17, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
I am addressing that issue, but from its reading it does not meet NPOV even in the lead. Perhaps this is just someone sneaking it in, or the lead becoming a dumping ground, but the issues need to be addressed promptly while on the main page. 209.255.230.32 (talk) 18:53, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
P.S. I cleaned the lead, but the problems are far too deep with loads of questionable insertions and a lack of citations, terribly redundant and ineffectual prose, and an array of other problems that suggest some editors are going to have to go through this with a fine-toothed comb before even considering it as a "Good Article". 209.255.230.32 (talk) 19:01, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Privileges and immunities[edit]

I suggest to add some information to this article concerning the Privileges and Immuninities of the European Central Bank, which would also have the advantage that the contents of this article would be more clearly consistent with related information that is provided about the ECB in: International Organizations Immunities Act#Privileges, exemptions, and immunities of the act.

The ECB has been granted certain privileges and immunities as an international organization, in particular vis-à-vis the member states of the European Community (see page 7 of Legal Working Paper Series No 4, June 2007). Privileges and immunities also apply vis-à-vis the United States since the amendment of the U.S. International Organizations Immunities Act to cover the ECB ("The US International Organizations Immunities Act has been amended in order to extend that Act to the ECB (Executive Order of President Bush of 29 May 2003)", Footnote 10 on page 7 of Legal Working Paper Series No 4, June 2007, and 22 USC Chapter 7, Subchapter XVIII, more specifically 288f-5).

Could someone review this suggestion and please then add this information to the article? Thanks! --145.64.134.240 (talk) 14:29, 8 April 2013 (UTC)