Template talk:Capitals in Europe

Turkish Republic of NORTHERN CYPRUS

Nicosia has two parts: North and South.

• North Nicosia = Capital of Northern Cyprus.
• South Nicosia = Capital of Republic of Cyprus (Greeks)

England, Scotland, Northern Ireland & Wales

These 4 entities 'are not' independant & so should be deleted. GoodDay (talk) 22:30, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

I concur. Outback the koala (talk) 04:29, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

I think this template is just copied from the {{Europe topic}} template, where they're inclusion is probably necessary for things like "Culture of...", etcetera. It should probably be removed from this one, though. Nightw 05:34, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Why should it matter that they are not independent? Does anyone here dispute they are national capitals, or that they are in Europe? They should stay. Please say if you need citations and I will provide them. Daicaregos (talk) 07:43, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

(Cross posted from WP:COUNTRIES) Non-sovereign states and non-dependencies should be removed from all of these templates. Once you go below that level you step into the murky world of nationalism. This does not mean that nationalism is bad, merely murky. What makes Cardiff more of a capital than Vitoria-Gasteiz? Or Munich? Or Namur? That murkiness brings with it a subjectivity that is driven more by pride (and hurt when not included) than anything meaningful in an objective sense. The titles of the templates could be changed too to reflect that.

There are numerous templates being raised that share the same (essential) issue. Is it worthwhile keeping discussion in one place and coming to a common approach? --RA (talk) 08:54, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

The difference is that Cardiff (seeing as you specifically mention Cardiff) is a verifiabe national capital. Vitoria-Gasteiz, Munich and Namur are not. Here are some referenced sources stating that Cardiff is the national capital of Wales (there are also, of course, countless references citing Cardiff as the capital of Wales) : “... Cardiff is the national capital of Wales”, “... Cardiff has become the National Capital of Wales “, “The Cardiff urban area grew ... to become, recently, the national capital of Wales“, “Cardiff (Caerdydd in Welsh) is the national capital of Wales”, “... Cardiff as the national capital of Wales, not simply a British city”, “Cardiff is the national capital of Wales ... “, etc. Hope that clears it up. Cheers, Daicaregos (talk) 10:55, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

The understanding here & at other related articles & templates, is that non-independants should be excluded. That's how the sources are being & will continue to be interpreted, by most of us. GoodDay (talk) 14:22, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

But if there is a source which states that Cardiff is the NATIONAL capital of Wales, it means that Wales is accepted as a country! What else would one call it if not a country?!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:31, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

That's irrelevant as this template is meant for independant capitals. If it'll end the arguing though, let's RM the template to Sovereign capitals in Europe. GoodDay (talk) 14:34, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Please provide the link to your appointment as spokesperson? I have read through this Talkpage, where such things are decided (as you know), and at the moment there are two editors favouring the exclusion of the countries of the UK, two favouring inclusion and one appearing undecided. I have provided reliable sources that verify Cardiff is the national capital of Wales. Please explain why you choose to ignore neutral point of view, a fundamental Wikimedia principle and a cornerstone of Wikipedia. Daicaregos (talk) 14:38, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

When the Template is RM'd to Sovereign capitals of Europe? the argument will become irrelevant. GoodDay (talk) 14:42, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

You appear to have missed the direct questions posed in my previous post. Daicaregos (talk) 14:54, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

I know all about the reliable sources. My point is, the general understanding on these & related articles, templates is that non-sovereigns need not apply. That's the reason for why you keep hitting bumps when you push for inclusion. GoodDay (talk) 15:04, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

If you, as you say, know all about the reliable sources, why do you ignore the policy? And why do you refuse to answer direct questions? For the third time: please explain why you choose to ignore neutral point of view, a fundamental Wikimedia principle and a cornerstone of Wikipedia. Thank you, Daicaregos (talk) 20:43, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

I've already given my response. GoodDay (talk) 21:07, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Let's move the artile title to Sovereign capitals in Europe, if people don't want Edinbugh, Belfast, Cardiff & London (England) listed. GoodDay (talk) 21:39, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Here's a question. Why do English people consider their own country to be less of a country than Scots and Welsh people do? Answers on a postcards. Jack 1958 (talk) 01:02, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

What people think is irrelevant, on this subject. England, Scotland, Northern Ireland & Wales aren't independant. Because of that, many editors want them excluded from these template. GoodDay (talk) 14:10, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Second question. Why would a Canadian care so much about Scotland, Wales and England that they would make a point of following every vote on every subject on it to make sure that they are not called countries? Jack 1958 (talk) 01:16, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm just the caring type. Anyways, at the moment, I'm the only one calling for an RM, so relax. GoodDay (talk) 14:10, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

PS: As I pointed out to Dai, if we RM this article to Sovereign captials in Europe, the country/nation/national argument gets eliminated. GoodDay (talk) 14:20, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Personally, I don't see it as a big deal. But moving it to "Sovereign captials..." (and I assume that you rather mean "Sovereign state capitals...") would present a number of issues or outcomes that I would be opposed to. Firstly, it'd require the removal of the bottom two sections, which'd be a mistake as I think a lot of readers would be interested in the capitals of dependent territories like the Faroes, or in the capitals of the European Union. It's relevant information that'd be missed. This is a template, after all, and is intended as a navigational aide. Ease up a bit. Nightw 16:06, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

I suppose an RM would be too drastic here, as we've already got a sovereign state section. GoodDay (talk) 17:46, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Back to my initial concern: Why are their English, Northern Irish, Scottish & Welsh entries in the sovereign states section? These ARE NOT sovereign. GoodDay (talk) 17:54, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

This seems very straight forward. Lets remove the non sovereign countries. Outback the koala (talk) 22:05, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

This Template is for Capitals in Europe. Wales, Scotland, England and Northern Ireland each have capital cities. They are shown on List of national capitals and should be shown on this template. A better solution, and per NPOV, would be to change the name of the 'sovereign states' section to either 'nations' or 'countries'. Daicaregos (talk) 08:28, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, this template is just a transclusion of the {{Europe topic}}, meaning they'd have to be removed from that template for it to appear so here. Maybe we should end this thread, and just continue the discussion either at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries or Template talk:Europe topic. Nightw 12:42, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Capitals

By the way, why are we pipe-linking? Why not show the cities themselves? GoodDay (talk) 17:49, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Already done here; Template:List of European capitals by region - where the same UK debate is going. Outback the koala (talk) 22:06, 16 October 2010 (UTC)