Jump to content

Template talk:Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Comments

[edit]

Why use Hong Kong, China instead of Hong Kong? :O --Yacht 09:14, Mar 5, 2004 (UTC)

That's their official name in the organization, because the PRC wants to emphasize that HK is part of China. That's how theyre listed on the apec website. --Jiang 13:18, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Oh, i c. but that sounds redundant anyway... ;) --Yacht 13:43, Mar 6, 2004 (UTC)

Yacht, many places in the world are happy to have the name of their country abbreviated in some way, but this does not seem to be true of anything "China". For instance, I live in Australia, and I am happy for it to be known that way. Technically it is the "Commonwealth of Australia", and that is how it appears on all official documents. I would even suggest that in the official namelist of APEC it is "Commonwealth of Australia", even if it doesn't say so on their web page. Recently I changed "Brunei Darussalem" to just "Brunei" to save some space, and Jiang reverted my change. I think he is basing his mods on this page.

Jiang, in english we capitalize acronyms, so that would be "the APEC website", not "the apec website". - Gaz 14:36, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)

In internet forums, we sometimes often capitalization out of laziness. Please understand that.
As I explained elsewhere, the official name used is relevant and important. Part of the agreement in 1991 to allow the Chinese into apec was to have one China be known as the "People's Republic of China" and the other as "Chinese Taipei". The latter would not be a member now if it had insisted on using "Taiwan" or "Republic of China". Beijing would also love to be known as simply "China" since it claims sole legitimacy to the title. Adding the "Darussalem" after Brunei is just for consistency since we need to use official designations for the Chinas. --Jiang 22:13, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)

The boxes at the bottom of country-pages seem to be getting out of hand (for example on United States. The geographical boxes made sense as a navigational aid, but boxes for every major treaty organization seem to be rapidly leading to clutter. I mean, should most of the nations of the world receive a U.N. box at the bottom? Can anyone provide reasons why I shouldn't be bold and remove the APEC msg's? Shimmin 03:45, 8 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Countries#Footers:_functionality,_aesthetics_and_standards. We should be removing them soon. I'm giving 1.5 weeks. --Jiang 04:55, 8 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

I removed the logo - it's under fair use right now, which means it can only be used in the article namespace. See Wikipedia:Fair use. --Jtalledo (talk) 12:31, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

There are plausible reasons for modifying a navbox templates which does not appear at the bottom of the page at Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC). The template does appear at the bottom of the page for current leaders of each APEC member. An opportunity for discussion needs to be part of any process which precedes change.

A. The main navbox is very good: {{APEC}}—Template:Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation

B. Deleting the current leaders navbox?

This is a poor subject for a navbox because leaders change irregularly over time. The functional utility of this "leaders" navbox is not greater or better than the main navbox which shows member nations and serial summits.

C. Perhaps decision-making may be helped by comparing an array of similar groups and templates?

What is the best next step for this article? for similar articles? --Tenmei (talk) 00:54, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:Asia-Pacific_Economic_Cooperation&oldid=572131875"