Talk:List of passports

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Travel and Tourism (Rated List-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Travel and Tourism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of travel and tourism related articles 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.
 
WikiProject Lists (Rated List-class, Low-importance)
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.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Merge[edit]

Currently missing from the list are: Abkhazian passport, Kosovan passport, UNMIK passport [1], Transnistrian passport, Macao Special Administrative Region passport, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region passport.

Additionaly, if applicable, there should be articles for passports issued to/by SMOM, BN(O), BOTC, the rest of List of states with limited recognition, Cook Islands, Niue, United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories, the rest of United Nations member states (some of them already have articles created, but are missing from the list - see the "passport template" at the bottom.

Maybe it would be convenient if we put subgroups in the list for EU passport, CARICOM passport, Andean passport - eg. to list states that apply the particular passport type together so that it is clear what passport group type is utilized there.

Of course, still not moved from the gallery article are the pictures, the notes/references, the discussion page. Alinor (talk) 08:26, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

This article hasn't yet really been merged successfully: a list of passports is followed by a gallery of them. Anyhow, my intent is to combine the two within a table (with countries either organised just alphabetically or as such within continent), but have not had time to as yet. Open to suggestions. Stay tuned. Bosonic dressing (talk) 18:17, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Of these above, it seems that still missing are Somaliland passport (see here), Sahrawi passport (page 39), South Ossetia passport ([2]), Nagorno-Karabakh passport (if any). Cook Islands and Niue use New Zealand passport (see here). I am also not sure if all british and other dependent territories types of passports are included. Alinor (talk) 12:49, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
for additional types of "special documents", few of them also missing, see page30-31. Alinor (talk) 12:52, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Of the british territories are missing the following: Pitcairn Islands passport, Falkland Islands passport. The rest of the BOTs are uninhabited/military/research personnel only (BAT, BIOT, SBA, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands) - citizenship of those seems possible only in exceptional circumstances, so maybe there are no such passports (the exceptional cases could get British passport as after the 2002 Act they get automatic full British citizenship. Only persons related solely to the SBAs do not get it automatically, but maybe they would get a "generic UK passport" - see below for residual categories).
Missing from the page are also the passports for residual categories of british nationality: British National (Overseas) passport, British Overseas Citizen passport, British subject passport, British protected person passport (assumingly they all have the same front cover with the sole marking of "UK passport" without territory/nationality type - the second here). Alinor (talk) 12:57, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
I am not sure whether the "residual categories of british nationality" should be added. This is after all a list of passports (and these are all british passports) and not a list of nationalities for which a passport exists. Creating a red-link invites the creation of separate wiki, whereas the lesser used ones (BC, BOC) might be better off at the british passport or the relevant nationality-type article. L.tak (talk) 16:19, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
OK. But we should have the type of passport utilized by these multiple groups - the "UK passport without other marking" (see link above) - it is different from regular/other special UK passports. And maybe to add a footnote listing by what citizens it is used. Alinor (talk) 12:24, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Massachusetts passport[edit]

After the Dred Scott decision, which declared that a black man could not be a citizen of the United States of America, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts issued at least one passport to a black man, declaring him a citizen of the Commonwealth and requesting all to let him come and go, etc. J S Ayer (talk) 01:39, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Diplomatic Passports: Pakistan[edit]

Pakistan issues special passports to its diplomats. Should Pakistani diplomatic passport be added in the Contemporary Diplomatic Passports gallery?

--Themadhatter3269 12:11, 7 December 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Themadhatter3269 (talkcontribs)

Sure - if you can find a free image to upload... BushelCandle (talk) 05:43, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Map of passport colours[edit]

A map of "passport colours across the world" has been placed into the article, spanning the entire top portion of the page (800px image size). The photo has been removed three times by two different editors. I'd like some input from other editors about the encyclopedic benefit of a map of passport colors. It would be similar to a "map showing the number of pages in a passport by country" or a "map showing the dimensions of a passport in inches by country". It seems so unimportant what color the front of it is, or a graphic of passport colors by county. There are pictures of all the passports of the world in the article; just look at the front of it. My thoughts, but I'd appreciate the input of others. Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 03:38, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Yeah 800px is necessary if you want to be able to see anything, Wikipedia style guidelines specifically allow larger resolution with maps and such where you need to see some detail. A map at 200px is good as no map at all. The reason the other editor removed it was the missing Hong Kong and Macau, and I thought such a move was pretty brusque because it took me the whole eight seconds to add them, meaning he could have done it as well instead of completely removing it, but the point is, that issue is now fixed. If you can raise any specific issues - go ahead. Just like all the articles on Wikipedia, this map can certainly be improved. Doesn't mean we should remove it. I am sure you can find some small errors even in many featured articles. Maybe you should nominate them for deletion? Well, no, that's not how things work, when you notice a mistake you fix it, you don't go and destroy the whole much larger thing for a few specks. And the fact you find something "unimportant" and think that's grounds to remove things from Wikipedia is frankly shocking. Who do you think you are to decide what stays and what goes based on how interesting it is to you personally? Such a category does not even exist, that is some awfully misplaced egoism right there. Someone might find video games unimportant - yet the article on one is a featured article on the main page of Wikipedia. No one in their right mind thought about removing that article because it's boring to them personally.--Twofortnights (talk) 10:24, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
As stated in the edit summary, the errors in the HKSAR and MSAR passport areas were only examples. One more example was given: FO is also missing. Also, several countries do not seem to have colours matching the colours in the passport gallery. Also keep in mind that the HKSAR and British National (Overseas) passport areas shouldn't both be in the same colour. Some other examples of errors:
  • Looking at the gallery, Gabon and Benin seem to use passports in the same colour, but they are marked with different colours on the map.
  • Ethiopian passport colour in the gallery doesn't match the map.
There may be more errors, but I haven't compared all passports with the map. --Stefan2 (talk) 11:40, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

So if FO is missing how about you add it? There are about 194 countries out there, and you want to remove the whole map because one territory is missing? Such errors exist in probably every article out there, so let's just shut down Wikipedia by that logic. The whole point of Wikipedia is that it is a community edited encyclopedia, which means everyone through their contribution slightly improves the content. If the strategy was to remove everything that is short of perfect Wikipedia wouldn't exist.--Twofortnights (talk) 12:41, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

The Ethiopian passport color you mentioned is the perfect example! The one that was shown in this article was actually the old passport from the era of People's Democratic Republic of Ethiopia which ceased to exist in 1991. The fact that it was in this article, by your logic, means that this article should have been deleted immediately. I have however applied my logic and changed the image to the current Ethiopian passport. Now you think what would benefit Wikipedia more - deleting this whole article because one image is wrong or fixing that image? I am 100% sure my action, to fix, is the way to go, and that your action of removing things is completely wrong. Even content with errors is better than no content as it attracts other editors to improve it. If there is no content then no one has an incentive to improve it.--Twofortnights (talk) 12:46, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Cameroon passport[edit]

I can't seem to be able to add the file to the wiki text if anyone can help me out or just add it that would be great.

https://yo.wikipedia.org/wiki/F%C3%A1%C3%ACl%C3%AC:Nigerianpassport.jpg

161.52.14.72 (talk) 10:37, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Same think goes for the passport of Surinam found on the russian wiki

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A4%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%BB:Suriname1-3.jpg

161.52.14.72 (talk) 11:04, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

You can't include images from other wikis, such as yo:Fáìlì:Nigerianpassport.jpg and ru:Файл:Suriname1-3.jpg, on this project. Furthermore, there is no evidence that the governments which issued the passports have licensed them, so it has to be assumed that the passports are unlicensed. This means that the images can't be used on this page as they would violate WP:NFG. --Stefan2 (talk) 13:23, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Simplification[edit]

I'd like to raise again the topic of article simplification first raised after the merge by Bosonic dressing at 18:17, 18 October 2009 (UTC).

I propose
a) this article needs no lead section (see WP:BEGIN for rationale)
b) this article simply begins with the H2 heading of

1 Contemporary ordinary passports.

This would avoid us having to pretend to be an arbiter of what is a "sovereign country" and include all the passports that have at least some acceptance for international travel. Those passports (such as those of Transnistria and Northern Cyprus) that have very limited acceptance internationally would continue to be named in italics - as per the current first section
This first section heading would have the same subsections of the current galleries, but with Europe placed in ABC order

1.1 Africa
1.2 North America
1.3 South America
1.4 Asia
1.5 Europe
1.6 Oceania

c) The second section then becomes

2 International organizations and sovereign subjects of international law

d) The third section would be

3 Contemporary diplomatic passports

There would then follow:

4 Types
4.1 Special passports
4.2 Travel documents issued to non-nationals
4.3 Common design passport groups

and

5 References
6 External links

Are there any rational objections and, if so, why? BushelCandle (talk) 23:57, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

I've made a start with territories beginning with the letters "A", "Y' or "Z" being moved and checked so far at: User:BushelCandle/List of passports.
Everyone is very welcome to assist the moving/checking at that page in my user space... BushelCandle (talk) 02:11, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
I've now moved and checked territories beginning with the letters "A", "U", "V", "W", "X"", "Y' or "Z" at: User:BushelCandle/List of passports.
Everyone remains very welcome to assist the moving/checking at that page in my user space... BushelCandle (talk) 03:36, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
I've now completed the moving and checking of countries, territories and organisations beginning with the letters "A", "D", "E", "F", "G", "H", "I", "J", "K", "T", "U", "V", "W", "X", "Y' or "Z" at: User:BushelCandle/List of passports.
Everyone remains very welcome to assist the moving/checking at that page in my user space... BushelCandle (talk) 04:53, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Remaining in the old list[edit]

These are the passports that still need checking at User:BushelCandle/List of passports and/or images to be found and then moved to the new comprehensive 'Section 1' at User:BushelCandle/List of passports:

BushelCandle (talk) 05:33, 13 March 2016 (UTC) Updated BushelCandle (talk) 01:31, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

List of remainders updated BushelCandle (talk) 02:32, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Since there have been no opposing comments, I intend to implement the changes outlined above very shortly.
At the time of writing there are still 17 passports remaining in the list above. I'm particularly exercised by the "Pitcairn Islands passport" entry. There are only a handful of people on Pitcairn that do not have British or New Zealand passports and nobody seems to ever have seen one of these strange beasts. Do they really exist ? BushelCandle (talk) 02:36, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Only 11 now remain and since there still have been no opposing comments, I intend to implement the changes outlined above very shortly. BushelCandle (talk) 08:14, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Only the (mythical??) Pitcairn Islands passport now remains so, since there have still been no objections, I will now proceed to update the article with the code at this version in my user space: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:BushelCandle/List_of_passports&oldid=710114804 BushelCandle (talk) 01:31, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
 Done BushelCandle (talk) 05:20, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Who gets Italicized?[edit]

Presently, the article says, "Passports where the captioned country is shown in italics are issued by entities that lack widespread diplomatic recognition." The linked article features four classes of states: UN member states not recognized by at least one UN member state, Non-UN member states recognized by at least one UN member state, Non-UN member states recognised only by non-UN member states, and Non-UN member state not recognized by any state. We should treat each of these four classes in a consistent way.

UN member states not recognized by at least one UN member state include: PRC, South Korea, Cyprus, Armenia, and North Korea. None of these passports are currently italicized. I think this is correct.

Non-UN member states recognized by at least one UN member state include: Palestine, Kosovo, Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, Taiwan, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, and Northern Cyprus. All of these states are italicized except Kosovo and Palestine. This doesn't seem consistent.

Non-UN member states recognized only by non-UN member states include: Nagorno-Karabakh and Transnistria. They are both italicized.

Non-UN member state not recognized by any state include: Somaliland. Somaliland is italicized.

I am being bold and italicizing Kosovo and Palestine since they are they only exceptions. Alternatively, we could un-italicize Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, Taiwan, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, and Northern Cyprus.

192.80.111.38 (talk) 15:44, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

I am trying to be bold again by changing the rule to, "Passports where the captioned country is shown in italics are issued by states that are neither member states of the United Nations nor United Nations non-member observer states." This rule is consistent with the current state of the article with Kosovo italicized and Palestine not italicized. 192.80.111.38 (talk) 18:14, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Non-Free Images?[edit]

There are a lot of reversions lately citing WP:NFCCP, but there's no discussion on the talk page about how this policy applies here. I'm not a wiki-lawyer, but it seems like of the ten criteria, the usage on this page seems to unambiguously meet criteria one through seven and nine. Criteria eight is inherently subjective, but I believe it is met as well. Criteria ten, updating the image description page, seems to have been unmet. Is the only rationale for removing the images that the image description needs to be updated? Rather than reverting the changes, couldn't we make the necessary changes to the image descriptions instead? Do people generally agree that the other nine criteria are met or do people feel that one or more of the other criteria are unmet? 192.80.111.38 (talk) 00:22, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

The problem with using images in lists articles such as this is that the usage tends to be decorative and not contextual and fails WP:NFCC#8. There is no sourced corresponding discussion of the cover so basically the file is just used to show what the cover looks like. This is something which is generally not considered acceptable per WP:NFTABLES and WP:NFLISTS. Many of these images are being used in stand-alone articles about the passport itself, so there's no real need this type of use per number 6 of WP:NFC#UUI. You'll probably get more feedback from others if you ask about this at WP:MCQ or WT:NFCC since more editors are likely watching that those talk pages that are watching this talk page. Just add a link to this discussion or use Template:Please see. FWIW, similar types of non-free usage (not just passport covers) has been discussed quite a bit at WP:FFD and previously at WP:NFCR, and the consensus typically has been that such type of usage does not satisfy WP:NFCC. Maybe you are planning to use the files in a different way? You can always start a FFD discussion about a particular file and see if you can establish a consensus for using it in this article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:30, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Arton Capital's Passport Index[edit]

This website has a collection of quality images of all the passports: https://www.passportindex.org/ --Ermahgerd9 (talk) 06:08, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of passports. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:01, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Non free images?[edit]

I don't get it. I took the images of passports from their respective pages. So it's fine for them to be there, but not here? If so, then what's even the point of this page? AndreyKva (talk) 10:06, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Each use of a non-free file needs to satisfy the ten non-free content use criteria listed in WP:NFCCP. The fact that a non-free file may be used in one article does not automatically mean that the non-free use in other articles is policy compliant for the reasons given in WP:OTHERIMAGE. A passport image being used as the primary means of identification in a stand-alone article about the passport itself is generally considered to be an acceptable type of non-free use. On the other hand, non-free images are almost never allowed to be used for individual entries in list articles such as this for the reasons explained in WP:NFLISTS or in image galleries for the reasons given in WP:NFG. Decorative non-free use (simply showing a an image) is simply not going to be allowed because the context required by WP:NFCC#8 is almost always lacking.
Still, if you feel that the non-free use of these files in this article does satisfy all ten of the aforementioned non-free use criteria, then please provide a non-free use rationale clearly explaining why for each use. Be advised though that there is a pretty strong consensus established against this type of non-free use, so it's going to require a really exceptional non-free use rationale to justify such a use; otherwise, it's very likely to be considered to be inappropriate if discussed at WP:FFD. This is pretty much the same for all similar type of list articles, such as lists of notable people, lists of albums by bands, list of books by authors, list of flags, etc. If you would like some other opinions on this, you can ask at WP:MCQ or WT:NFCC. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:35, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
If it's such an issue, then all images of passports should be removed from this page. They're not necessary and it would be much better than having images for some passports and having ugly placeholders for others. Instead, it should be a plain list of links to national passports, icons for flags, flags of any international organizations or communities the passports also apply to, and ePassports. AndreyKva (talk) 10:48, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
I agree with that assessment and personally don't see any real encyclopedic value of what is essentially one large image gallery (see WP:NOTGALLERY). The galleries could be replaced by a table or bullet list with links to each entry's stand-alone article. Some alternatives might be to remove the current place holders and their respective entries altogether, replace image files with links per WP:COLON, or find another more suitable placeholder (perhaps File:No image.png). There is a problem with adding links to the file pages though because the gallery markup does not really accept wikilinks in lieu of an actual files. A table format on the other hand would allow for links to the actual file pages to be easily added.
Freely licensed or public domain files are not subject to WP:NFCCP, so removing them would be more of an editorial decision than a policy based one. You can be bold and change the formatting if you like, but that's a major change and someone could just as easily change it back. You might want to wait a bit to see if anyone else responds here and offers an opinion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:26, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
I went ahead and turned it into a table. So far, it looks good. There are some tricks with tables that I don't know yet. Ideally, I'd want to align the table to the right, and align the organization flag icons to the left, but I have no idea how to do that. Other than that, I think it's a good standard for how the page should look. AndreyKva (talk) 23:42, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
It's OK to be bold, but (as I posted above) sometimes it's better to be WP:CAUTIOUS when making major changes to an article: converting from galleries to tables is a major format/layout change. You probably would've been better off proposing the change on the article's talk page and waiting a bit to see if there was a consensus for such a change. As I also posted above, removing the PD and freely licensed images is more of an editorial decision than a policy based one, and it appears that at least one person (Twofortnights) might not agree with their removal. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:53, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
Thank you Marchjuly. I completely disagree with any editing that goes along the "all or nothing" idea. Just because we can't find suitable images for all passports does not mean we should then destroy the article by removing images for those passports for which we have found the right files. This does not mean that the article should not be formatted to look better etc. But please AndreyKva, do not make such major edits without consulting.--Twofortnights (talk) 11:01, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
I give up. I saw the article in a very poor state, so I went ahead and started working towards a better article, but if I keep being reverted while no-one agrees on what a better article is, then what's the point? In my opinion, consistency is important. This page shouldn't be an ugly gallery with inconsistent, mostly low-res images for passports, around a third of which can't even be put up here due to copyright nonsense, which results in them having one of the two placeholder images. The way I see it, it should be all or nothing. Yes or no. Not yes, no, maybe, I don't know, or I think so. A table format provides an excellent way to quickly convey the important information, with the only downside being that the ugly passport pictures are gone. But if that isn't good enough, then whatever. This was a waste of time, and it's a really shitty thing to brand my edits as "a disaster". AndreyKva (talk) 11:18, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
I am sorry if I offended you, however I really don't see the point of the tables that replaced the current content. It was a list of countries with small flags of organizations which in most cases have nothing to do with the subject of passports. The only information that was conveyed was the information on whether the passports were biometric or not but that's already present in the article. As for "all or nothing" again, I vehemently disagree. If we followed that logic maybe there would be no Wikipedia at all. The idea is to improve the articles where the information is incomplete and to build on existing content. Your view is that we should have no content where we don't have 100% of the content. But even featured articles get constant updates and improvements.--Twofortnights (talk) 11:36, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
You're making (wrong) assumptions on my logic and what I think Wikipedia should be based on a few of my edits on a single page and my frustration towards bureaucratic faff. My views here are irrelevant, because I'm not contributing to this page any longer. And at least you could have reverted from my "disaster" to Marchjuly's version with better placeholders. AndreyKva (talk) 11:57, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

"If it's such an issue, then all images of passports should be removed from this page." - not really. In most countries passports cannot be copyrighted, cover pages of national passports are free to use.--Twofortnights (talk) 11:48, 4 November 2017 (UTC)