Talk:Exclusive economic zone of Vietnam
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Exclusive economic zone of Vietnam article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Move discussion in progress
[edit]There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Exclusive economic zone of Portugal which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 06:02, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
200 nm from mainlands only is correct
[edit]The EEZ shown in reference http://www.seaaroundus.org/data/#/eez/704?chart=catch-chart&dimension=taxon&measure=tonnage&limit=10 is incorrect, showing projection from Paracels and Spratlys to midlines, which is not advocated by any of the countries on the sea.
https://www.marineregions.org/eezdetails.php?mrgid=8484 used to show a similar map, but has corrected to show 200 mile projection from mainlands only, and show the center region of the sea beyond 200 miles as a disputed region. Malaysia and Vietnam introduced this in their 2009 CLCS submissions #33 and #37 at https://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/commission_submissions.htm , Brunei accepts it, and the 2016 Philippines v. China UNCLOS arbitration endorsed it, putting all non-China claimants in agreement on mainland projection only. China on the other hand has still not proposed any EEZ demarcation lines of any scheme. --JWB (talk) 17:04, 27 June 2020 (UTC)