Talk:List of administrative divisions by country
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
- 1 Maldives
- 2 Incomplete
- 3 Length
- 4 Move
- 5 Mexico
- 6 Greece
- 7 France
- 8 Kosovo?
- 9 Faroes & Greenland
- 10 Niger
- 11 Flemish
- 12 Greece
- 13 Palau
- 14 Language choice
- 15 Western Sahara case
- 16 New Discussion
- 17 Canada?
- 18 The Netherlands
- 19 Belgium and Switzerland
- 20 Western Sahara Flag
- 21 British overseas territories and crown dependencies
- 22 Listing First Divisions
- 23 Poland
- 24 Hungary
- 25 Canada
- 26 Russian Federation
- 27 Correction: Turkey
- 28 Language
- 29 azerbaijan (and other partially filled-in levels)
- 30 London (First tier)
- 31 Moscow
- 32 External links modified
- 33 Belize
I realize this table is long, but am not sure if it would benefit from being split; I'm imagining anyone wanting to print it would prefer a continuous version...? Regards, David Kernow (talk) 05:55, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
- Perhaps separate pages could be created for each continent? Say at Administrative divisions of Europe etc.? --Astrokey44 11:42, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
- I oppose spliting. The table is not that large, and there is a definite benefit from having all info in one place. Renata 15:46, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
This article superseeds List of subnational entities, because it is about the same thing and is far better. I suggest simply moving all the content there. If anyone cared to clean up that list, it would look something really similar to this table. No need to duplicate content, just replace some old ughlee inaccurate list with this nice table. Renata 15:46, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
- Agreed. That list looks terrible with redlinks and arbitrarily chosen maps --Astrokey44 22:36, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
I didn't want to edit it myself since I was afraid I would mess up with the layout of it, so I rather discuss this first. Some municipalities in Mexico (less than 10) are further subdivided administratively into delegaciones (boroughs) as well (see: Boroughs of Mexico for further details), arguably making it a third-level administrative division. The great majority of the municipalities, however, simply use "auxiliary presidential councils" (presidencia auxiliar) with or without clearly prescribed limits. --the Dúnadan 23:16, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
- If there are further subdivisions, they can be listed and properly annotated. Rarelibra (talk) 15:38, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
270+ demoi(municipalities) are 3rd level administrative entities, based on the article, not 4th level, so when the maintenance is over I'm thinking of adding that as a note. Logictheo (talk) 09:18, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
In this table the cantons are shown as the third level, while Cantons in France is listed in the fourth level category. This is because the regions are shown here in brackets with the departments the first level. Is this correct that the departments are 1st level? --Astrokey44 00:40, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
- The regions have limited administrative responsibility, and are mostly historic in reference. So yes, the departments are the 1st level. Rarelibra (talk) 15:38, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
- Is there any official listing of the departments as first level? If not, I think the departments on down should be moved to second level and so forth, with the regions as first level. I'll do that myself in a couple of days if no one objects. Inkan1969 (talk) 23:29, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
- i don't think the regions of france could be skipped as 1st-level subdivisions. they do hold that status in france, being the departments the 2nd-level one. at least iso (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_3166-2:FR) recognises both levels. your american FIPS codes as well (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_FIPS_region_codes_(D%E2%80%93F)#FR:_France) and the same for the EU nuts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NUTS_of_France). anyway, let's wait for more opinions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sacdegemecs (talk • contribs) 15:51, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
Kosovo has been listed, but is not properly recognized as a "country" by the United Nations. Should it even be in this list? Such a situation would then cascade into allowing listing of other such independent or autonomous areas, regions, etc. I say we should remove it. Rarelibra (talk) 15:38, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Faroes & Greenland
I do not think it is appropriate to display the Faroe Islands and Greenland in this table as a 1st level administrative districts within Denmark. Those are autonomous territories that, while belonging to the Danish realm, are not "part of" Denmark. --Bjarki (talk) 15:40, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
The names of Subdivisions have changed, following the decentalisation and devolution plan 2002-2006. Most borders remain the same (none of the top level borders have changed). The actual names of the individual subdivisions have not changed in most cases, just the appelation.
- Departments have become "Regions"
- Arrondissements have become "Departments". I've seen two references to devolution to "Arrondissement" level falling above communes, but no list of actual Arrondissements.
- Communes/Communes Urban / Communes Rural. Titles remain the same, but there have been some name changes.
Refs:Mbaye Mbengue FAYE, Faria Ibrahim GESTION DES DECHETS ISSUS DES SOINS DE SANTE (DISS):RAPPORT PROVISOIRE, World Bank, Niamey, Décembre 2001.
FONDS AFRICAIN DE DEVELOPPEMENT: ETUDE DE MOBILISATION DES EAUX DANS LA REGION DE MARADI NIGER. DEPARTEMENT AGRICULTURE ET DEVELOPPEMENT RURAL, OCAR. African Development Bank Group, MARCH 2003
I managed to find reprints of the 2002 laws full text, but it seem it was only in the period of 2004-2006 that the renaming was implemented. State department uses the new titles it its most recent counrty briefing but without noting the change.
There is no such thing as a Flemish language. The official languages of Belgium are Dutch, French and German, Flemish is not. It is not an official term, not even recognised by linguists, and can mean French Flemish, West Flemish, East Flemish... Brabantian or Limburgish, the other Dutch dialects of Belgium (which are both spoken in the Netherlands as well and thus cannot be called Belgian, let alone Flemish, which is a group of other dialects) and especially Standard Dutch can't at all be called Flemish. It is a popular misconception, but strictly incorrect. For those who do not believe me : check the pages on Belgium, Dutch language, Flanders, Flemish (linguistics)...--Roofbird (talk) 05:47, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
270+ demoi(municipalities) are 3rd level administrative entities, based on the article, not 4th level, so when the maintenance is over I'm thinking of adding that as a note. Logictheo (talk) 09:18, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
According to States of Palau, these are 1st level, not second level subdivisions. -- User:Docu
Why are administrative divisions in this article given in languages other than English? I'm pretty sure English Wikipedia's naming conventions prefer English when this is an option. In fact the links on this page invariably link to articles with English language names. Vvelaya'at -> Provence etc... Blue-Haired Lawyer 18:44, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
- Because as you will see by many of the articles, some of the names are proper in English. As for the Kenya names you attempted to change, the articles that they wikilink to are in correct English form. This table is a global reference for someone and it is proper per country. Rarelibra (talk) 23:47, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
- You appear to have confused me for someone else. I've never touched the Kenya entry. I am aware that the wikilinks link to the correct English form, but that doesn't answer the question over why the English names aren't used here. Using lots of word which are all both unintelligible and unpronounceable to English speakers appears to rather pointless. Blue-Haired Lawyer 11:33, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
- It appears quite clear to me that the rule on English Wikipedia is that English should be used. Why should an exception be made here? Blue-Haired Lawyer 15:25, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
- I changed the Kenyan ones, English is an official language in Kenya (and it is used, education is primarily in english) and since these english names are available and used, I would think the preference would be for the english. This is like the south africa entry, the names are in english, not any of the other 10 official languages they could be in. 220.127.116.11 (talk) 19:48, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
As stated - update the numbers, but a lot of us have worked hard to get this table as accurate and detailed as it is. So please do not alter the names. Thanks! Rarelibra (talk) 21:51, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
- I am trying to improve the accuracy of those names. I have not changed any of them back, but I would appreciate the reasons for putting Kenya's divisions in Swahili. If the convention in this table is to use local languages I do not know enough of wikipedia policies to debate that, but for consistency within this table it appears to me the Kenyan names should be in English. Look at the entries for Botswana, Gambia, Gabon, South Africa, Nigeria and Seychelles. All have multiple languages including English and the names are in English. Why is the Kenyan one not in English when the language is used by the government and used in schools (When I was in primary school (public) I learned about provinces, districts and so on, not mkoa and wilaya). I am not saying the Swahili terms are not used but that the English terms are used just as much, if not more especially since most Kenyans will encounter these terms in school, which as I have said are taught primarily in English. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 23:59, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
- My point is don't just attempt to use a couple of countries - look at many of the other countries. The key here is the wikilink is proper, and the local name is used in an attempt for a global picture. This debate has gone on under many of the pages for them to be in English - but this table has been built with hard work. We can probably change the first and second layers of the Kenyan names - but the remaining layers - especially if they don't translate - will remain the same. I just don't see the point - what next, pick on Poland, Lithuania, and others? If we want to switch the Kenya entry to multiple use like Botswana, etc. that is fine. My whole point is we have BOTH here and I didn't like the fact of someone coming along and changing it only into English and losing the multiple part. It is a VERY useful reference to have. Rarelibra (talk) 05:12, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi everyone. I popped over from Third Opinion to help you settle the dispute.
Let me see if I've got it correct: one person says "we should always use English," while the other person says "we don't have to." Is that roughly correct?
I've looked through the relevant WP:MOS sections and related pages, and the one part that leaped out at me was: Foreign words should be used sparingly. It looks to me like far too many foreign words are used in this page. I would suggest that the English terms be used, with the local terms in parentheses.
So for example:
This ensures that the English term is given prominence (per MOS), while still including the local term. I find the lack of references worrying, though.
I'll be keeping this page on my watchlist if you have any questions. // roux 13:59, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
- Roux - appreciate the input. That is actually what we were doing all along (with some exceptions overlooked, I'm sure). The whole debate started from someone who swept through and REMOVED all of the native terms - which takes away from the encyclopedic value. Rarelibra (talk) 13:14, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
Western Sahara case
Western Sahara is actually administrated by Morocco (resolution S/2001/398 of 24 April 2001) but the UN statute of this region is non self-governing territory. If you consider the administrative power of Morocco in the region, you need to keep the changement I made but if you consider it as a non self-governing territory, you need to delete it from this list as Western Sahara isn't a sovereign country.--Moroccansahraoui (talk) 14:39, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
A discussion has been started at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries/Lists of countries which could affect the inclusion criteria and title of this and other lists of countries. Editors are invited to participate. Pfainuk talk 11:53, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Why are the provinces of Canada given individual listings? No other country's first rank subdivisions are given such a listing, except for the UK's four constituent countries. What makes Canada's subdivisions so special? Inkan1969 (talk) 21:25, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
- Nothing much, really. It may be that the person that added this info was considering the differences between the subdivisions in each province; at the third tier, New Brunswick has parishes, whereas Ontario has regional municipalities, and Alberta has summer villages (for example). At the second tier, there is still some variation between them, but this may not be of relevance here. Mindmatrix 15:59, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Why is the Netherlands divided in 12 provinces, Aruba and the Netherlands Antilles on the first level? I think this should be changed, one way or the other. The Kingdom of the Netherlands consists of three countries, i.e. The Netherlands, Aruba and the Netherlands Antilles. In this table, The Kingdom as a whole and the country are not separated from each other. One solution could be to list all the three countries separately, like the British overseas dependencies. Another solution could be to rename the country in the list to 'Kingdom of the Netherlands' and put the three countries 'Aruba', 'The Netherlands' and 'the Netherlands Antilles' in the first level of administrative divisions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wgeelhoed (talk • contribs) 12:13, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Belgium and Switzerland
I was wondering whether it is fair to only include one native language in the table, when all languages are official. For Belgium, French and German deserve to be in the table as well (next to Dutch); for Switzerland, German (by far the majority language there) and Italian as well. I don't think this will hamper readability (but respect official multilingualism). Kind regards, --Roofbird (talk) 09:36, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Western Sahara Flag
British overseas territories and crown dependencies
Ok, I understood why the provinces of Canada are given individual listings (each has different subdivisions). But I don't see why the British overseas territories and crown dependencies are given speciall treatment. The explanation on the article - "Where these have administrative divisions, they are listed as if separate countries" - are usable for most of other countries' dependent territories.
As placing them under the United Kingdon would be a major change on the article, I would like to know if anybody has a reason against doing it. Thanks and regards. Gvogas (talk) 23:22, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Listing First Divisions
I was thinking it might be an idea to have a list of all of the first-level divisions for each country. I'd be happy to add this myself, but I don't want to cause an upset if the consensus is to just keep numeric values. Xtremerandomness (talk) 10:27, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Please use these informations from Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_divisions_of_Poland): The administrative division of Poland since 1999 has been based on three levels of subdivision. The territory of Poland is divided into voivodeships (provinces); these are further divided into powiats (counties), and these in turn are divided into gminas (communes or municipalities). Major cities normally have the status of both gmina and powiat. Poland currently has 16 voivodeships, 379 powiats (including 65 cities with powiat status), and 2,478 gminas. Many thanks in advance (User Brunoma from Cracow, Poland) 0:29, 4 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk)
- It is deliberately in plural form; if you look in all the other entries in this table they all use the plural form. - htonl (talk) 12:44, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
I don't understand the change, the second level is Census division, not municipalities. Municipalities (or technically census subdivisions are on the third level. -- Earl Andrew - talk 20:50, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
- Census divisions aren't administrative in all provinces. They are statistical divisions in most provinces. I'm glad to see the removal of the individual provincial listings. There are no individual listings for all 50 states in the US. Hwy43 (talk) 02:54, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
if i'm right, at least québec is subsequently divided into régions (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_regions_of_Quebec), which, at first glance, i would describe as being in an upper level than the municipalities mentioned in this table (defined as 3rd level subdivisions). each municipality (or equivalent) drops into a corresponding région, as it can be checked here (http://www.mamrot.gouv.qc.ca/repertoire-des-municipalites/fiche/municipalite/). any comment? sacdegemecs (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sacdegemecs (talk • contribs) 19:34, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
what about the federal districts of the russian federation? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_districts_of_Russia) they are not mentioned here and they look for sure like an upper-level subdivision — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sacdegemecs (talk • contribs) 09:21, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
- They are not administrative subdivisions and not mentioned in the Constitution.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:36, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Turkey has only two levels of administrative divisions. 81 il and 900+ ilçe are the only ones.
The rest mentioned in the table, namely belediye, neighborhood and villages have no administrative power at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 20:09, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
This page uses local language names for the subdivisions, even if this is an English language Wikipedia. People expect to see English language on this page and not the local language. For example people who don't understand German or don't have a clue about the German political system will not know what the word Bundesländer mean. They also don't understand that they (as States of Germany) are comparable to US states or Australian states. I don't understand why they are written in the first place in the local name, when most of them (not sure about every single one) have an English language name and an own article with that English name, so the English language name should be used because this is an English language Wikipedia. Ransewiki (talk) 20:45, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
azerbaijan (and other partially filled-in levels)
i have a conceptual question regarding countries such as azerbaijan, where the first-level subdivisions shows an upper void, lacking subdivisions, and a lower filled with the muxtar respublika. should we understand that the muxtar respublika relies at the same level than the rest of the azerbaijan? if so, the rayons of the rest of azerbaijan can really be considered second-level subdivisions as the rayons of the muxtar respublika.
i asked this because i detected some slight differences comparing the 2 versions of the ISO_3166-2:AZ article, depending on being the english one (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_3166-2:AZ) or russian (https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_3166-2:AZ), the former being purely plain and the latter looking more accurate and adding more nuances regarding the levels of subdivisions.
my doubts grew even more when i found out the article about the regions (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regions_of_Azerbaijan), where the muxtar respublika shows up as an equal subdivisions of the other 9 regions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sacdegemecs (talk • contribs) 10:35, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
London (First tier)
The highest level subdivisions of England are the nine regions. The London region, known as Greater London has a devolved assembly and a directly elected Executive. In addition it is a First-level NUTS of the European Union. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 12:59, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on List of administrative divisions by country. 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141022020857/http://www.newera.com.na/articles/53580/President-divides-Kavango-into-two to http://www.newera.com.na/articles/53580/President-divides-Kavango-into-two
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071027094149/http://www.statistics.sk/mosmis/eng/run.html to http://www.statistics.sk/mosmis/eng/run.html
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://dailynews.co.tz/index.php/home-news/46650-songwe-is-new-region-with-four-districts
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.