Talk:List of countries and dependencies by area

Merge proposal

Since the three articles List of countries and outlying territories by total area, List of countries and outlying territories by land area, and List of countries by percentage of water area have overlapping information, it would make sense to merge them into one. This would also eliminate some contradiction that currently exists between the three articles. I can do the merger myself, but I just wanted to make sure no one had any problems with it. --Lasunncty (talk) 08:56, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Are you just going to make one larger table? That'd be fine in my opinion, although details on de facto states etc. may take awhile to fix! Chipmunkdavis (talk) 20:24, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I was going to put it all into one table. --Lasunncty (talk) 23:58, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

As you can see, I have completed the merger. I used the CIA source in most cases as that was most complete. All notes have been preserved from each page before the merge. Feel free to make corrections/alterations as need be, or let me know if there are any concerns. --Lasunncty (talk) 21:31, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

I definitely agree with a merge and I'm willing to help wherever possible. My reasons for reverting:

• I disagree with using the CIA as the main source for this. Firstly, its calculations are inconsistent, since from what I can tell it adds coastal waters to some entries but not others. Secondly, using any particular government as a main source for a country list is inappropriate where more diverse sources exist. Irksome politics are clearly introduced by the unbalanced inclusion criteria—Kosovo is included but states not recognised by the U.S. are absent, including any mention of the Palestinian territories in Israel's entry. Using another encyclopaedia or even the UN would be better.
• I also disagree with diverging from the ISO criteria, as has been done with the addition of Antarctica and the exclusion of various entities previously mentioned. If we don't stick to a clear inclusion criteria, the list contradicts WP:LIST and risks opening it up to random additions.
• My other concerns are mainly to do with content. The second sentence (which looks to be the only possible criterial element mentioned) doesn't make sense. The last sentence in that paragraph is probably the reason for the {{contradict}} tag at the top. There are flagicons in the notes section. Nightw 13:11, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

The contradict tag is likely inherited from the issues brought up at Talk:List of countries by percentage of water area. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 13:14, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

These are legitimate concerns. However, each of the individual articles have the same concerns, plus the fact that they do not agree with each other. At least if they are all in one place we can eliminate contradictions somewhat. ... I chose the CIA as the main source because it was most complete and up to date. The UN source only has total area (which in most cases agrees with the CIA source anyway), does not include all territories, and is three years old. I do not know of any other source that is comparable to the CIA source. ... I think Antarctica should be included because it is a very large area that is not included in any other territory. (Plus, by the way, it is on the ISO list.) Other entities which are not included (disputed/nonsovereign territories) have their areas already accounted for, and can be mentioned in the notes column. ... The second sentence makes sense to me. ... The notes and references do need a lot of work, but since they were inherited from the individual pages before the merger, the problems there are not new. --Lasunncty (talk) 07:25, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't realise that Antarctica was on the ISO list. That's fine to include then I guess. But any other divergance from this would be unacceptable. Our guidelines for lists require a verifiable inclusion criteria. This is essential for disputed entities, where we simply cannot use the U.S. government's POV as our criteria. I will look for a more up-to-date and complete source from the UN, or from an affiliated organisation. Nightw 11:31, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

I agree with the proposed merge. bd2412 T 16:52, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Working out the various kinks here. Should be finished soon. Nightw 02:08, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Discovered more problems with the WFB. The main one being that it appears to be a collation of data from different sources. So it's taken the area published by the Dutch government for the Netherlands, and the area published by the Canadian government for Canada. The U.S. itself seems to use a different method of calculation (includes coastal waters) than used by other countries. It leads to obvious disproportions in figures (compare the figures for British Indian Ocean Territory and Solomon Islands). It also seems to prefer rounding figures to the nearest hundred. Lastly, comparing it with UN and World Bank data from 2007, it seems outdated. Nightw 14:38, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

I disagree with the removal of uninhabited dependent territories, they have an area and should be included. CMD (talk) 14:47, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I missed that note in the lead. It's not actually correct, so I've removed it. Unless you can see any specific ones that are missing...? Nightw 11:58, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

I also merged the units column. It doesn't do much to reduce clutter. WP:UNITS doesn't actually require us to present non-SI units, so the sq mi figures can go if it looks too haphazard. Nightw 12:10, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

That was a BIG mistake to merge the pages. Everything is so confusing, information is changed and is incorrect, everything is so different, it is just too overwhelming. It was much better when there were separate pages, now everything is mushed together in an unattractive matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.51.79.126 (talk) 01:12, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

I agree with CMD. That is, I disagree with the removal of uninhabited dependent territories; they have an area and should be included. For example, US Minor Outlying Islands (UM) comprise 34.2 square kilometers of land area and 267 square kilometers of water (lagoons) area. Jeff in CA 12:36, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

New data

Given the above, I've replaced the CIA data in the first column with a new version. It uses the UN document we use(d) on the total area page as its main source, but this is supplemented by other sources where the calculation method used was apparently not appropriate.

There are still a lot of kinks to be worked out. The main one is the obvious conflict created with the other columns (the water percentages will have changed)—though this was also a problem in the replaced version. Since using separate data from different sources in each column is less than ideal, I will start looking for a UN document showing land/water areas. Any help in that regard would be appreciated. Nightw 14:48, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

States with limited recognition

I actually wouldn't mind seeing these in the list, although I don't think they should be numbered, and their area should still be included in the claimant state area, with appropriate notes on both. As it currently stands, all are mentioned in footnotes except Kosovo, which is mentioned in the prose Notes. CMD (talk) 18:29, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

I agree. An alternative solution would be to have a separate section for disputed states. (And Kosovo is now a footnote; it should have been there before, but a code error caused it to appear in the table. Bazonka (talk) 19:47, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't see the value of a separate section, considering the point of this article is to present a single list. So to be clear, my proposal is

1. Create separate, but unranked, entries for states with limited recognition.
2. In these entries, have a quick note about their being claimed in their note section.
3. Bring information about them in their parent state note section out from behind a note, as it's quite important.

CMD (talk) 13:31, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

The reason I suggested a separate section is so that we don't get double counting. It would be nice for the areas given in the list to add up to the earth's total land surface area, rather than counting some places twice (e.g. Kosovo's area counted both under Serbia and under Kosovo). However, this is not a big deal, and I'm quite happy with your proposed changes. Bazonka (talk) 21:35, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

I added them, but only the total area so far. Do they work? CMD (talk) 17:56, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

The article includes Abkhazia, Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, Northern Cyprus, Somaliland, South Ossetia, Transnistria and Western Sahara. By analogy, it should also include Azawad and Tamil Eelam. Jeff in CA 12:38, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

France

France is quite strange, in that its total area is less than its land area. 551,500 and 640,427 respectively. This also doesn't match the France page, which gives the former as 674,843. If that were correct, the ranking at 49th would be incorrect and it should be up around 41st. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.119.57.82 (talk) 16:37, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

It's because I split off the overseas departments into separate entries. Not sure whether that was the best thing to do. I still haven't gotten around to finding a land-area source from the UN. Nightw 16:46, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

France's total area is 674,843 (according to the wikipedia page). This is the correct number. This number includes all of France's integral parts, not just Metropolitan France. If you only include Metropolitan France, it would be like only including the contiguous United States in the US' area. French Guiana, Martinique, etc. are all integral parts of France and need to be included in the area; they are not just territories, they have the same status as Corsica, or even Paris (this being a true part of the country). Please fix this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.51.79.126 (talk) 00:32, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Here we are five months later and this problem is still not fixed?? What is wrong with this site?! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.5.190.156 (talk) 07:12, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

sort by column is wrong

this is beyond my very limited Wiki knowledge so could someone please fix this...

when you sort by the numerical columns, e.g. Total in sq km, it treats the data alphabetically instead of numerically, so all the countries that have data starting with a "9" are listed before thouse with an "8" and so on... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.67.72.64 (talk) 23:15, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

That happens anytime you have mixed content in a "field", ie. numbers and letters, the system will treat the column as alphanumeric and sort as such, where 99 comes after 100 (as bb would come after abc). The same happens when you put refs in the same field as the number that should be sorted. We should come to a consensus as to how we want to fix this list, should we remove the square miles as most of the world uses km2, should we separate the km2 and sq mi into separate columns, should we yell and scream at Wikipedia programmers to fix the underlying issue?--UnQuébécois (talk) 17:27, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

We can also add {{nts}} to each number to get it to sort right. I'd prefer to just get rid of the sq mi, since they're not required by WP:UNITS. Nightw 17:34, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

I knew if we yelled and complained they would fix it! I did not know about that {{nts}} thing, it would have saved me some editing elsewhere!--UnQuébécois (talk) 17:48, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Actually I forgot the {{convert}} template has a |sortable=on parameter, so that should do it. I'll go through the table and add it tomorrow. Nightw 17:53, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Cheers Night w. That'll be much easier than the {{sort|000xxxxx{{convert|xxxxx|etc}}}} hack I've been using elsewhere. CMD (talk) 20:57, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

yes that would be annoying... Nightw 17:02, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Greenland

Greenland is not a country and it does not deserve its own spot on this list. It is a territory of Denmark, and if anything, should be included in Denmark's area or not at all. You should either remove Greenland or remove it from having a number. You are confusing people who read this list, making them think Greenland is actually a country. By putting territories on this list you also screw up the order of each country by size. For example, Saudi Arabia is listed as the 13th largest nation while Greenland is the 12th. In reality, Saudi Arabia is the 12th largest. You also do not even include that Greenland is a territory in the notes section, only at the top in which people are less likely to read. The page is called "List of countries by area" not "List of countries and dependent territories by area." I suggest making another page and calling it "List of dependent territories by area" so Greenland, other territories, and countries can have proper recognition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.51.79.126 (talk) 01:56, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Greenland is an autonomous country within the Kingdom of Denmark, not to be confused with Denmark, another autonomous country in the Kingdom of Denmark. It is akin (Not exactly) to the relationship some of the Commonwealth Realms have or have had with the the UK. But Hawaii on the other hand should not be in this table imho.--UnQuébécois (talk) 17:33, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Greenlands relationship to Denmark is quite different to the commonwealth realms relationship to the UK. Greenland is represented in the Danish parliament, and is legally a full part of Denmark. It however has such extreme amounts of autonomy it is often considered separately to Denmark proper, such as in ISO 3166-1. We based inclusion around ISO 3166-1 (although obviously differences exist). CMD (talk) 20:48, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Akin : essentially similar, related, or compatible. The situation is also similar to Puerto-Rico's place in the USA. There are no two political systems in the world that are exactly the same, but the current Greenland situation in the Kingdom of Denmark has similarities to the Commonwealth Realms (especially historically). — Preceding unsigned comment added by UnQuébécois (talk • contribs) 21:16, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Well, I definitely agree that the realms pre Westminster would be comparable to Greenland now. I'd say the closest equivalent to Greenland now would be Hong Kong and Macau. Technically part of their larger country, but functionally separate. It's probably worth noting the status in the Notes I think. CMD (talk) 21:46, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Kosovo

Kosovo should be ranked.KOSOVO IS COUNTRY,not depent country,IT'S INDEPENT!Not every country regonised Kosovo but it is country! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikinikolananov (talk • contribs) 17:28, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Table of the countries

Sorting the table is not working as it should be. Ranking is not working because it is sorting digit of a given number. Is compares starting with the first digit of each number(so 90 will come after 235, because 9 > 2). Same story for the number of Total are, Land area and Water area. Taartly (talk • contribs) 16:45, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

This is from a coding error, which is set to be fixed, per an above discussion. CMD (talk) 16:46, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry! I got distracted. It's done. Have a play around though and let me know if I've broken anything in the process. Nightw 17:02, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Percent of Earth surface

I think it would be useful to have a "percent of Earth's surface" (or "percent of Earth's land surface") column similar to the "Percent of world population" column on the "List of countries by population" page. --Khajidha (talk) 13:57, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

List of Countries where the numbers to not add up.

Given the following rule Total Area <= Land Area and Total Area = Land Area + Water Area we have irregularities in the following countries.

Contry name	Reson for discrepancy	Fixed
Honduras
Cuba
South Korea
Serbia
Czech Republic
Panama
Latvia
Slovakia
Dominican Republic
Estonia
Netherlands
Switzerland
Republic of China
Moldova
Burundi
Indonesia
Fiji
The Bahamas
Lebanon
Puerto Rico
French Southern and Antarctic Lands
Palestinian territories
Trinidad and Tobago
French Polynesia
Samoa
Turks and Caicos Islands
Mongolia
Bahrain
Singapore
Guam
Seychelles
Antigua and Barbuda
Barbados
United States Virgin Islands
Maldives
Marshall Islands
British Indian Ocean Territory
Macau
Gibraltar
South Africa
Colombia
Mauritania
Egypt
Tanzania
Namibia
Mozambique
Pakistan
Zambia
United States
Ukraine
Botswana
France
Cameroon
Australia
Germany
Finland
Vietnam
India
Italy
Burkina Faso
New Zealand
Gabon
Ecuador
United Kingdom
Uganda
Tajikistan
Nicaragua
Åland Islands

|}

64.211.102.18 (talk) 12:00, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

It also looks like some "countries" have more water than the total area. Why are we including coastal waters in this list, but not as part of the total area?--UnQuébécois (talk) 19:52, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

The reason for all of this is because the sources used are different. I haven't had much time to look for a replacement source for the other columns. Ideally, it should come from the UN stats department. Nightw 14:46, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Fixed that 64.16.220.132 (talk) 19:52, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

ranking by area in infoboxes on country article pages.

so this might be related to the problem @ Talk:List_of_countries_by_area#sort_by_column_is_wrong, there are at least a few country articles that are giving a wrong rank by area. Liechtenstein says #223 here, but 215 @ the Liechtenstein article in the info box. I see it with the smaller countries. what happened? I guess this needs to be fixed manually?? this page is sorting correctly, now , right? skakEL 21:37, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

All the "area" / "%" columns seem to be sorting okay! Just the actual Rank # still needs tweaking to remove the dashes to make it work. (Don't want to have too many cooks in the kitchen type thing!) --UnQuébécois (talk) 02:07, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

The sorting is fixed. Many country articles will be at odds with the rank on this page. They should be fixed on sight, although there should really be a consensus as to whether all entries are to be ranked or just sovereign states. Nightw 15:55, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

The "total" figures for the United States do not add up

The US' land figure is 9,161,966 sq km, water is 664,709 sq km, yet the total is 9,522,055 sq km. What? Where do these figures even come from? The note lists a whole slew of sources for the US' data. Why can't this be consistent with the rest of the world and use the United Nations Statistics Division data? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.121.55.76 (talk) 22:36, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Did you read the note? --hydrox (talk) 00:00, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Åland Islands

Is there any particular reason why the Åland Islands was deleted?[1] Jeffrey (talk) 12:13, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Night w kindly provided an explanation for his edit in the form of an edit summary, which you can read by reviewing the diff you linked to. An edit summary is a small piece of text intended to inform other editors, such as yourself, on the particular reasons why an edit was made. To save you clicking on your diff and reading the edit summary on this occasion, I'll explain here: the Åland islands are not a country, they're an autonomous region of Finland, and their area is included in Finland's total. As this is a list of countries and select dependent territories, places that aren't countries or are dependent territories already included in their controlling country don't belong in the list. – NULL ‹talk›
‹edits› 13:50, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

I read it already when I started this section. The Åland Islands is among those 'selected dependent territories' that are usually listed together with other countries. Jeffrey (202.189.98.142) (talk) 15:00, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

No, it's not. Look for Finland in the list, and read note 22 next to it. The Åland islands are included in Finland's area, they're not listed separately. – NULL ‹talk›
‹edits› 03:48, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

• Jeffrey is correct. The Åland Islands (Code AX) is among those 'select dependent territories' that are usually listed together with other countries. Check the various lists of "Dependencies and other overseas territories" on Wikipedia, Wiki Commons and elsewhere: the Åland Islands invariably are listed. Note 22 or no Note 22 (applies only to how the one person who entered it saw it), the Åland Islands should be listed separately. Also the Wikipedia article states, "The Åland Islands are governed according to the Act on the Autonomy of Åland and international treaties. These laws guarantee the islands' autonomy from Finland."

• Secondly, not listing the Åland Islands is inconsistent with the actual listing of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba (Code BQ), which are Dutch "municipalities," and various French territories that are "overseas departments." To their "controlling countries," these territories are considered integral. However, they also are invariably listed on Wikipedia, Wiki Commons and elsewhere.

• Jeff in CA 12:48, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Water area figures

Maritime zones

Are they about inland waters (e.g. lakes, reservoirs, rivers), or internal waters and territorial waters? Jeffrey (147.8.202.204) (talk) 15:21, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Did you read the article, Jeffrey? The answer is clearly written there. – NULL ‹talk›
‹edits› 19:54, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

I did. The problem is that for some entries the figures cover only inland waters, while some other cover also internal waters. This is confusing and inconsistent. Jeffrey (202.189.98.142) (talk) 15:04, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Internal waters and inland waters are the same for many countries, measured from the coastal baseline. Can you list the countries you believe have incorrect figures? – NULL ‹talk›
‹edits› 03:50, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, the article points out that some entries include coastal waters, but that then makes the water area column meaningless. As for an example where either one or the other figure must be wrong are Antarctica (0% water) and Greenland (81.05%). In Antarctica ice is clearly not counted as water, yet in Greenland it is. (In fact Antarctica does actually contain a number of hyper saline lakes). What about other countries with ice caps (Canada, Iceland, Norway etc.) are they included as land or water? If the method of measurement is not consistent for all entries, perhaps a colour coding scheme (or something similar) could be incorporated to indicate the methodology used to calculate the data. Just a suggestion...1812ahill (talk) 20:39, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

what about the „archipelagic waters” of countries like Indonesia, Japan and the Philippines? according to the wikipedia article linked, archipelagic waters are included with inland water bodies, yet they obviously are not counted in the total area since —looking on a world map— Indonesia with its archipelagic waters is visibly not smaller than DRC or Saudi Arabia. Marxolang (talk) 07:22, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Dispute territories between China and India

Aksai Chin and Trans-Karakoram Tract are controlled by China, claimed by India; while Arunachal Pradesh is under India control, most part claimed by China. When calculating the areas of these two countries, we should apply an identical rule to both countries, e.g. based on the Line Of Actual Control.

Do you have outside sources noting those areas or are you adding them up by yourself? I would have no objection to the latter, but I think we do need to note it here on talk (and I do agree with the line of actual control position). CMD (talk) 01:13, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

China

I'm not clear what is the source for the data on China. Total land area for China is shown to be 9,640,005 sq.km. According to the preamble on the page, "data are taken from the United Nations Statistics Division unless otherwise noted" and references "Demographic Yearbook—Table 3: Population by sex, rate of population increase, surface area and density. United Nations Statistics Division. 2008." That table shows area for China to be 9,596,961 sq.km. Note 3, associated with China entry, explains that "The area given is the United Nations official figure for Mainland China." Is this official figure different from data in Table 3 of the UN's Demographic Yearbook? If so, what is the source for that number (9,640,005 sq.km.)? WhyK? (talk) 22:38, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Who knows. Must've been changed recently along with a lot of others it seems. I'll change it back. Nightw 00:53, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

China is smaller than United States in the list, that does not make any sense!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.178.244.174 (talk) 23:36, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

United States

The area of the United States is 9,526,468 km2. Source: Encyclopedia Britannica (online). 5/9/2012. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.127.125.254 (talk) 02:12, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

How can both the United States and Canada be the largest countries in the Americas? The numbers say that Canada is the largest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.177.223.108 (talk) 11:05, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Much of Canada's territory is internal waters, the United States has a larger land area. CMD (talk) 15:42, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Missing Dependencies and other overseas territories

The following outlying territories are commonly included on various lists of "Dependencies and other overseas territories" on Wikipedia, Wiki Commons and elsewhere. They are missing from this list and should be included:

• Akrotiri and Dhekelia
• Åland
• Ashmore and Cartier Islands
• Clipperton Island
• Coral Sea Islands
• Paracel Islands
• Spratly Islands
• United States Minor Outlying Islands

• Jeff in CA 12:57, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

France's overseas departments/territories

I don't understand the rationale for excluding these from France's data. They are legally part of the French Republic. 71.205.174.204 (talk) 05:14, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Different Areas?

The recognized area of the US is 9,826,675 km2 and is the third largest country in the world. China's recognized area is 9,569,960 km2 (as currently listed) and is the fourth largest country in the world.

Anyways, the problem is that this page lists different areas than the actual country's page. For example, the US page lists the area correctly at 9,826,675 km2 while this page lists it as 9,629,091 km2. Why? You should include the same, and CORRECT areas on both pages.

Also, this page is totally screwed up. It should be like it was before, like a couple of months ago. For example, the territories/dependencies are listed the same as countries with the only difference being italicized. This is really confusing and some may not see the difference. You should not include numbers on the territories.

And why is Antarctica included? It's a continent not a country! Why include it just because no country's a part of it? Why don't you just include the moon while you're at it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.5.190.156 (talk) 07:09, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Antarctica is included as per the discussion above (near the top of this page). Shoe (talk) 21:57, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

United States Pacific Island Wildlife Refuges

This is not a territory, and should be removed. Instead the individiual territories should be listed.XavierGreen (talk) 16:39, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Canada

Isn't Canada being "The Real Largest country in the world and the Western Hemisphere by total area" wrong and/or meaningless?209.2.229.166 (talk) 02:17, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Vandalism, reverted. CMD (talk) 07:42, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Spain

Why it is mentioned to ceuta and melilla in do you her notice in the territories on Spain? They must not be mentioned, but the territory be included ado, are not special places of Spain.

--79.156.126.57 (talk) 19:15, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

These territories are included in Spain's area figures, as mentioned in the footnote. --Lasunncty (talk) 07:36, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Denmark

There's a message saying:

Part of the Kingdom of Denmark, which makes Denmark the 12th largest country in reality.

This means that someone who takes this literally will put Denmark up at that location in the table and remove it from its current location in the table. Anyone know what to do with it?? Georgia guy (talk) 18:54, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

As you can see under the discussion under Greenland above, Greenland like Denmark are part of The Kingdom of Denmark, which is not listed. So Greenland is not part of Denmark. The Faroe Islands are the third "state" in the Kingdom of Denmark and also listed separately. stasomat 2012-10-05 14:43 UTC.

Rank-order column (1,2,3) could be static and separate

See Help:Sorting#Initial alphabetical sort versus initial sort by rank order. See the section about adding a separate, static rank column (1,2,3) next to a table. This makes the table easier to update. --Timeshifter (talk) 03:51, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

This is a good idea, but I don't think it would work here. This method doesn't account for rows of different sizes or for unranked entries. --Lasunncty (talk) 09:58, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

You are right. Looking at the table again, I see that with a notes column the number of lines in a row could change easily depending on screen size. --Timeshifter (talk) 10:07, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

POV tagged

This article was tagged in relation to China and its area. A note is already added to explain this. I have remove these as inappropriate. Murry1975 (talk) 06:57, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Area of China

In the UN the official area of China is 9,596,961 sq km. There is an error in this article with its area. 10/4/2012. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.127.121.11 (talk) 01:07, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Ethiopia

I replaced the ~9.0% water area for Ethiopia.  It looked unlikely and is not supported by the value at the Wik Ethiopia page.  I used that latter figure (0.7%).  If I missed some-thing, feel free to un-do, with an explanation. Kdammers (talk) 08:27, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Indonesia:"Largest country wholly on islands."

What about Australia ?Robincard (talk) 19:32, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

The largest part of Australia is considered the continental landmass of Oceania, and therefore isn't an island. SiBr₄ (talk) 08:46, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

China is wrong

the PRC's total land/sea recognized borders are only total: 9.5 sq km, 9.8 comes from unrecognized claims such as the South China Sea, Taiwan, and other claims and holdings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.187.116.238 (talk) 21:15, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Those triangles

How do the triangles work? I clicked on each of the small black triangles at the top of the rank column. In one case, the areas got larger as I went down; but in the other case even though the numbers got smaller, the "largest" one was Eritrea. I don't understand. I thought one of them would give Russia, Canada, the U.S./China etc. at the top. In any case, there should be an indication of what the triangles mean. Many users will have no idea that they are tools.Kdammers (talk) 01:29, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Antarctica's lakes

Wikipedia (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Vosto) says there are more than 140 lakes in Antarctica. If that isn't reputable enoubh, how about http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-19196175, www.newscientist.com/.../mg21328475.200-myster... , www.msnbc.msn.com/.../strangely-moving-antar..., www.guardian.co.uk › News › World news › Antarctica, J Laybourn-Parry, DA Pearce - … of the Royal …, 2007 - rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org, or B Steven, R Leveille, WH Pollard, LG Whyte - Extremophiles, 2006 - Springer ?

The dimensions and topographic setting of Antarctic subglacial lakes and implications for large-scale water storage beneath continental ice sheets

JA Dowdeswell, MJ Siegert - Geological Society of …, 1999 - gsabulletin.gsapubs.org estimates the total lake surfface area in the Antarctic at 54,000 km².

Ecuador

Ecuador's entry in the table is odd: the land area excluding water bodies is larger than the total area. Maybe it shrinks when you add water, like a woollen sweater or George Costanza. Nankai (talk) 01:40, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

United States and China

Official area in United Nations: U.S. (9,629,091 sq km) and China (9,596,961 sq km). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.197.181.90 (talk) 04:45, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

As it explains in the notes, the figure for the U.S. includes territorial waters. It makes no sense to have them included in that entry but none of the others. Nightw 06:31, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Note: The total area of U.S. including territorial waters is 9,826,675 sq km. Source: CIA World Factbook. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.184.252.174 (talk) 00:25, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, sorry, my mistake. The figure given by the UN includes coastal waters, while the figure given by the CIA World Factbook also includes territorial waters. This is all explained in the notes section. Nightw 18:41, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Crown Dependencies/Overseas Territories of the United Kingdom

I've noticed that Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories of the United Kingdom, such as Jersey, Guernsey, Isle of Man etc. have "United Kingdom" in brackets next to them. I find this misleading, as they are not part of the United Kingdom and all are self-governing. They are however possessions of the British Crown, so I can see where the "United KIngdom" in brackets comes from. Surely this should be changed to either "British Crown Dependency" or "British Overseas Territory" where appropriate? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrmrbr (talk • contribs) 18:27, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

UK total figure?

Where does the total of 1,985,758 km2 come from? This is almost ten times the sum of the figures given for land and water areas. I know the note says that BOTs are included, but these together total less than 20,000 km2.Anonymous watcher (talk) 05:05, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Sudan?

How is Sudan's area N/A? Many countries have border disputes, and the other party (South Sudan) is listed. Sudan must be given some sort of figure — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.149.7.248 (talk) 15:20, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Sudan's total area is given, only the land and water area are missing. There probably aren't any official sources yet for the individual land and water areas of Sudan and South Sudan. SiBr₄ (talk) 15:37, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

List contradicts itself

Data in the table contradict iteslf in many entries. Examples (in square km): 1) India: water area: 314,070 + land area: 2,973,193 that equals: 3,287,263 but the total area column states:3,166,414; 2) Colombia: warer area: 100,210 + land area: 1,038,700 that equals: 1,138,910 but the total area column states: 1,141,748; 3) Mauritania: water area: 0 + land area: 1,030,700 that quals: 1,030,700 but the total area column states: 1,025,520 (So the total area is smaller than the land area?!!); 4) Egypt: water area: 6,000 + land area: 995,450 that quals: 1,001,450 but the total area column states: 1,002,000; 5) Tanzania: water area: 61,500 + land area: 885,800 that quals: 947,300 but the total area clumn states: 945,087;...

This list is an exampl of terrible Wikipedia's inaccuracy and unreliability. Some of these mistakes are clearlz visible to the eye even without counting it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.181.138.240 (talk) 09:28, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

The Moon

As much as I like the idea of the Moon being considered the territory of the United States, by international treaty, it is not. Lordcheeto (talk) 14:52, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

ISO 3166-1

How can this list possibly claim to have anything do to with ISO 3166-1? Antarctica is on the 3166-1 list, but not ranked here, while the Spratly Islands or the Coral Sea Islands are not on the ISO 3166-1 list, but ranked here. 109.99.71.97 (talk) 13:14, 15 February 2013 (UTC)