|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Asia-Pacific article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|WikiProject Geography||(Rated Start-class, High-importance)|
|WikiProject East Asia||(Rated Start-class, High-importance)|
1) Why are these countries listed as "may also include"? The term Asia-Pacific refers to the Pacific region that is on the side of Asia/Aus/NZ, hence "Asia-Pacific".
These countries are not included:
* California * Chile * Colombia * Costa Rica * Ecuador * El Salvador * Guatemala * Hawaii * Honduras * Mexico * Nicaragua * Panama * Peru
Please approve so we can apply the changes to this article.
2) Asia-Pacific should be written with a dash, as it is a bi-word denoting the Asia-Pacific region. The "Asia Pacific" without a dash is not used and is actually avoided as it may confuse people as to the meaning. It is similar in writing "South-East" not "South East". Please approve so we can apply the change to this article.
- A smaller article existed with the name Asia-pacific - I merged and redirected them. And yes, I'd agree that countries in the Americas are not included - when they are also included the term used is normally Pacific Rim. BTW, you don't need "approval" - be bold and make the changes! Grutness...wha? 01:02, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
- "Asia-Pacific" is a rather absurd geographical descriptor. It's like creating a "Europe-North Africa" region based on economic exchanges. In reality, the term "Asia-Pacific" does not enjoy wide usage. Rather, it is an artificial construct only used by academics and some politicians in Australia and New Zealand. ZwickauDeluxe 13:34, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- Asia-Pacific is also used extensively by corporations to describe their regions of operations. It isn't just an artificial construct used by academics. It is every bit as relevant as a phrases like "The Americas" or "Pacific Rim". Fehrgo 17:35, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Mongolia is not listed in the list of countries in the Asia-Pacific region, however the image clearly shows Mongolia as apart of the region. If someone could change the image, I would appreciate it. Barras 02:05, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
what happened to South Asia?
bummer, i thought South Asians (Nepal, bhutan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Pakistan and others) were all Asia Pacific Nations.
- Some "geographical purists" remove it, despite there are references. Search the revision history and just revert them until they came to the talk page. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 04:47, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
Pakistan,afghanistan,india are part of south asia, Asia Pacific covers the asian countries that border the pacific ocean where south east asia and east asia does. India, pakistan, and sri lanka border the indian ocean where the pacific does not reach. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk • contribs) 21:13, 8 November 2009
- You think in this way, but I think that Asia-Pacific means "the Pacific and that parts of Asia, which are close to the Pacific". There are references for this PoV, i.e. WP:reliable sources. BTW what means “a offical international organization”? Please, register yourself. It is not easy to prove something to a (changing) IP address ☺ Incnis Mrsi (talk) 17:46, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Pending consensus on adding South Asian countries to Asia-Pacific, and observing that Nepal and Pakistan are already in the list, I'm adding Bangladesh,India, and Sri Lanka as well. Anirudhvij (talk) 10:35, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
map and countries
this article seems to confuse the APEC politico-economic body for the geographic unit. Just because the APEC membership includes certain countries doesn't mean they are a part of it. Take NATO for example, with turkey and possibly georgia on the verge of joining, it still doesn't make either of them part of the North Atlantic region.