Talk:List of international call prefixes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Lists (Rated List-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
 List  This article has been rated as List-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Telecommunications (Rated List-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications 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.
 List  This article has been rated as List-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

The Netherlands and Belgium[edit]

The Netherlands is listed with 031 and Belgium with 032. Did someone confuse the international access codes with country dialing codes? These countries support the 00 prefix. The codes listed cannot possibly be prefixes, since 031 is used for some Dutch area prefixes (see and 03 in Belgium dials Antwerp (see

I will change this -- 06:39, 20 July 2006 (UTC)


how do u dial international in the uk?

  • 00. The article says "00 - All countries not listed below." and then does NOT list UK. hth 12:03, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup template[edit]

A cleanup template has been placed on this article. Looking at it, I see little that can be done to improve the page - what does the placer of the tag want? In terms of verifying the codes, the link at the foot of the page does that - albeit very tediously to check each one. I'm inc;lined to just remove the tag, but won't do so unless there is no discussion here by the end of Feb 2007. -- SGBailey 12:53, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Remove. I came to this page knowing what I was looking for and I found it. There is always room to improve an article, but in this case I see no strong reason for the 'cleanup' flag. Abut 13:39, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Old code in UK[edit]

I remember there being a different code in the UK (possibly Ireland too) up until around the mid 1990s. Was it 010? --Zilog Jones 15:59, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Yes. If you add that to the article, don't put it in the main list. Maybe in a history section at the end? -- SGBailey 18:01, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
It was 010 in the U.K. and 16 in the Irish Republic. (talk) 20:09, 12 June 2013 (UTC)


The link seems to be broken. It works with instead of, but I don't see how I can change it..

Bot report : Found duplicate references ![edit]

In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)

  • "ICTA" :
    • []
    • Calls to Kenya from Tanzania and Uganda require the code 005, followed by the area code and number. Calls to Uganda from Tanzania and Kenya require the code 006, followed by the area code and number. Calls to Tanzania from Uganda and Kenya require the code 007, followed by the area code and number.

DumZiBoT (talk) 22:23, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

need to add Costa Rica[edit]

Add Costa Rica to the list of countries using the 011 prefix Vbpett (talk) 16:36, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

According to Costa Rica uses 00. -- Bricaniwi (talk) 05:19, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Need to separate?[edit]

I think we need a simple page that explains the concept of "+" (plus) as

  • a notation when writing a number in international format, for example +1 202 456 1414 (the U.S. White House switchboard), and
  • a diallable character (either hold down "0" (zero), or double-click "*" (star)), on GSM and other cellular (mobile) telephones, which acts as the outgoing international call prefix independent of location.

That way, other Wikipedians can link to that page, to explain what the "+" is doing, without the reader being swamped with several (poorly defined) lists.

This article can then be reduced to a list of outgoing international call prefixes. --Nick4mony (talk) 03:28, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

IMHO no need for a separate page just for the + sign as a place-holder for the international prefix. I have clarified (I hope) the explanation. Anyone can link to the article page (using a piped link maybe) to explain what the "+" is doing. I don't think there's enough else to say about it for a full separate article (but if you have a history, origins, controversies about it, or (in)famous usage errors maybe??) -- Bricaniwi (talk) 05:39, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Optional carrier selection digits[edit]

The treatment of optional carrier selection digits (usually indicated by x in the article) is somewhat inconsistent. It is mentioned for some countries (like Japan and Israel) but not other countries (like Australia and New Zealand).

There probably needs to be a main list (without optional carrier selection digits), and a subsidiary list that gives more detail for subscribers wishing to explicitly exercise a choice of carrier. Note that many countries, like New Zealand, will not appear in the main list (because they use the standard 00), but will appear in the subsidiary list to explain how optional carrier selection is exercised in those countries.

To expand the example further, New Zealand uses 00, but to choose a carrier you use 0501 (Clear Communications, now TelstraClear), or 0591 (Telecom NZ), or 016(?) Price Required Service (Telecom NZ).

Australia uses 0011, but to choose a different carrier, you use 14xx 0011 (xx chooses the carrier), or 0018 (Telstra easy half-hours), or 0015 (fax transmission), or 0012 (Price Required Service, now defunct).

Note that the main list will have some carrier selection digits, for countries like Mauritius or Brazil where it is always an error to leave out the carrier selection digits (ie not optional). --Nick4mony (talk) 03:57, 5 November 2009 (UTC)


I removed Egypt from the list of exception because in Egypt we use 00 as the international calling prefix please refer to the National Telecommunication Regulatory Authority of Egypt ( the numbering plan chart ( —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oh127 (talkcontribs) 15:45, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Cyprus: Historic code[edit]

According to the list of historic call prefixes, Cyprus used 00357 to dial out of the country. That seems very unlikely to me. Nowadays 00357 is used to dial into Cyprus, so I wonder if that might not be the source of the information.

I'm removing Cyprus from the list. If somebody has a definite source for 00357 being used to dial out of the country, please feel free to revert my edit. --Oz1cz (talk) 12:41, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Additional dial tone in Hungary[edit]

According to 164/2005. (VIII. 16.) kormányrendelet 1. számú melléklet 4. "Tárcsázási eljárások" ("Dialing Procedures") Telephone Service Providers must not provide an additional dial tone since 01 January 2011.


-- (talk) 18:53, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

This article lists "dial out" codes. What about "received" codes?[edit]

I am trying to do some research regarding a text message communication I have received from what appears to be a cell phone based in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Given the scammish nature of the electronic communications I frequently receive from people who claim to be in various parts of the world, I am trying to authenticate the origin of the phone number, but the list for this page includes only codes used to dial out from different international countries, not those I should expect to receive on caller ID from those placing international communications to me.

Caller ID is a well-known and well-established modern-day convenience. However, as I suspected might be the case, my online Wikipedia research indicated that Caller ID Spoofing seems to be rather common and easy for those inclined to implement regardless of the questionable legal status of actually using such spoofing mechanisms. Such legal status seems to depend on the country of origin of the spoofed message. In any event, this knowledge is what is leading my further research. Unfortunately, neither article was capable of answering my query.

I have received international phone calls on my cell phone before. Typically, those numbers have shown up as "unavailable" or with limited information on my cell phone caller ID, but it is possible that there might be reasons I am unfamiliar with which might also cause that to occur, other than caller ID blocking. In particular, the reason for my research this time is because I received a text message from a foreign country regarding a professional inquiry for which I provide services AND there was what appears to be a legitimate phone number attached to the message. If a text message is going to be responded to, it necessarily must contain a phone number for which to respond. The only detail still making me suspicious is the response method requested, but given the expense of international calls and text messages, at least for now, I am willing to set that aside.

Previous scams I have received pertain to a different profession for which I also provide services, but all of those were easy to spot because of the identical nature of those messages and the fact that those messages were sent via email, for which I've since found a way to prevent this from ever occurring again by requiring more effort than such scammers wish to waste. I have also received text messages with the exact same opening line and explanation I had received from the email responses I no longer receive. I have ignored such text messages since there is really no way for me to prevent or block those. However, the specific nature of this inquiry appears to be genuine.

So I am really curious about four things here:

  1. Should this article also contain a section providing information about how inbound international calls or text messages would look on caller-ID to the receiver, either via telephone call or SMS/MMS message, with the understanding that frequent international travelers with cell phones may have valid reasons for "invalid" cell phone caller ID origins?
  2. Should a separate article be created for this purpose, or perhaps several articles depending upon the country that the call originates from and is received by, assuming that this is a unique display across different countries and that the unique complexities involved might require that solution? If not, then the single page option would be sufficient.
  3. Should all international calls/communications received necessarily show up as "unavailable"? If yes, then adding this to the article would, I believe, enhance the understanding of this process to the reader. If this is the case, it would probably be a two-sentence section addition. This may also potentially be a factor of my residency in the United States rather than an issue pertaining to international calls received in other parts of the world, although I have noticed that calls using the xxx-xxx-xxxx call format used in Canada and the USA seem to show up that way on Caller-ID as long as they are not blocked by the sender.
  4. And as a last question, is this topic covered somewhere else on Wikipedia? If it is, I was unable to find it, so any pointers, to me or within this article, would be helpful to the reader.

My knowledge of dialing/receiving international calls/text messages is rather limited, and it may also be for other Wikipedia users, which is largely what led me to this Wikipedia article, and thus this new talk section. I am also not a very experienced Wikipedia "talker"/contributor as I have only made minor edits to very few articles, and I do not recall ever contributing to a talk page before, so I hope this discussion and inquiry is not out of place. Also, if the community believes this query would be better served in a different talk page elsewhere on Wikipedia, please let me know and I will move it there.

Prosopguy (talk) 03:45, 31 August 2014 (UTC)