File talk:Global European Union.svg

What about Réunion? Thierry Caro 00:02, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why are Estonia and half of Latvia not shaded green? Currently it looks like they were not part of the EU. Kpalion 10:22, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Em.. they are green. - Ssolbergj (talk) 10:40, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why the archipelagos of Madeira and Azores (Portugal) do not appear, but the Canary islands (Spain) do???

Fixed. Rob984 (talk) 20:26, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please add the Outermost Regions of Madeira and Azores to the map, because we can see the places where these is supposed to be (and Madeira and Azores have the same status in the EU as the Canary Islands, for example). Maycoll F. Vieira (talk) 17:01, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Rob984 (talk) 20:26, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can you add Kosovo with the next update? Thanks --Kolja21 (talk) 17:37, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Rob984 (talk) 20:26, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kosovo is part of Serbia. If you are not sure, hot about Crimea ? Can you add borders Rob984, Kolja21... dont forget with Donbas, Abhhazia and Ossetia. --Mile (talk) 12:45, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mile, look at Cyprus. We don't mark disputed territories that are only recognised by one country in these maps. We have special maps for regional conflicts. --Kolja21 (talk) 13:29, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think context is key. The EU recognises Kosovo and considers it a candidate country, meaning it is certainly worth showing. Northern Cyprus actually isn't part of the EU, regardless of its disputed status. We don't show Greenland as part of the EU, despite being part of a member state, because it legally is not part of the EU. The definition of the EU's territory is very clear, meaning Northern Cyprus should not be coloured. Rob984 (talk) 18:06, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In accordance with the style of similar Grey-Green maps, should the de facto Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus be coloured in a lighter shade of green to indicate it's claimed status as part of the Republic of Cyprus and by extension of the European Union? Since in reality, Northern Cyprus is outside the jurisdiction of the EU. (Example) --Shibo77 16:56, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it should be coloured at all. EU law doesn't apply there so it is not part of the EU. Other member states have territory which is not part of the EU and is therefore not coloured. For example Greenland is part of Kingdom of Denmark but not part of the EU. This map shows the territory of the EU, which is clearly defined. It is not simply a membership map. Rob984 (talk) 20:26, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Currently the entire island is coloured in dark green. --Shibo77 22:27, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The vote has happened, but the implementation of the breakup has not happened yet. The UK is still part of the EU. Don't change the map. Bueller 007 (talk) 13:48, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am submitting a protection request for this file. The borders of the EU have not changed and remain the same. Until they do, the map should not be modified. It has been repeatedly over the last couple of days. Erikeltic (talk) 11:35, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The UK is not in "the process" of exiting the EU as of today's date. That would require the PM to execute article 50 of the EU charter, which is not going to happen until October. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. This file should remain the same until something actually changes. Here is a citation for you if you would like to learn more about the process of the UK's exit. [1] Erikeltic (talk) 11:45, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You do know the first part of the process of leaving the EU was the referendum where 17 million people voted to go out? Paperwork in the EU and in the UK is already being made and processed, obviously. No, they haven't formally left, but now every single day is working towards leaving. Caitlyn Jenner wasn't officially declared a woman by the U.S. long after she came out, but Wikipedia obviously started refering to Jenner as "her" long before it became official. It's only logical, and marking it orange would only be fair, in my opinion. --ThiefOfBagdad (talk) 11:59, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Caitlyn Jenner is a non sequitur [2] and has nothing to do with whether or not Article 50 of the EU charter has been activated. It has not. That is what needs to happen for the "process of leaving the EU" to begin. I suggest you save your file for October and/or whenever the PM of the UK executes Article 50. Your orange file will be helpful during that period of time, I'm sure. The thing is that it isn't accurate right now. A lot of things can happen -- the petition for a second vote, Scotland leaving the UK, etc. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball and in the absence of sources that we can cite to the contrary, status quo should remain in effect. Erikeltic (talk) 12:08, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I mean then why not just change the color code to: Planning on leaving by 2016. That's a pretty big deal in itself and worth showing on the map. --ThiefOfBagdad (talk) 12:30, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Because that is factually incorrect. Once article 50 of the Treaty of Lisbon has been enacted, the EU has up to two years to act. Meaning, unless you know something the rest of the world doesn't changing it to that or anything else (at this moment) would make the map inaccurate. Also, please find consensus before editing it again. An edit war serves no purpose. Erikeltic (talk) 12:36, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Take what happened at the EU Parlement today. The EU President literally asked British Nigel Farage "Why are you here?"(Source) Even the EU President agrees with me that the UK doesn't serve the same purpose in the EU as it did before. I'll change the color code to: Planning on leaving. because the UK is pretty much a defacto non-member at this point (according to the EU President). --ThiefOfBagdad (talk) 11:03, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why can't I edit anymore?? The debate wasn't finished yet! --ThiefOfBagdad (talk) 11:03, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You can't edit the file because it was protected. I'd agree with changing the colour to indicate the UK's intention to leave. While the referendum is not legally binding and it's possible the UK could end up not leaving, that seems highly unlikely. So I think it's reasonable to change the colour despite the fact that Article 50 hasn't been invoked yet. The key could say "Countries that are planning on invoking Article 50 and leaving the EU" to make it clear that they haven't invoked Article 50 yet. --ChiveFungi (talk) 18:57, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is really nothing more I can say about this that hasn't been said, except perhaps to remind everyone that Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. The policy is pretty clear on this subject and is not up to interpretation of individual editors. Find a verifiable source that says the UK has invoked Article 50 and declared its intention to leave the EU. At that point, the UK would still be in the EU for a period of time, but the circumstances would certainly be different. Were that the case, I'd agree with you that it'd be worthy to note on the map. In the absence of that, the UK remains in the EU so the map should not be updated (yet). Erikeltic (talk) 01:57, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

At this point, it's two people against one for this map change. Even the EU President isn't taking the UK seriously anymore in the Parlement. The circumstances are ALREADY different. --ThiefOfBagdad (talk) 06:46, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ThiefOfBagdad: Consider yourself very lucky that you can edit anything, as the solution to this type of situation is normally to block the disruptive overwriter rather than to protect the file. As you've been repeatedly informed, you need to read and understand Commons:Overwriting existing files. No one is stopping you from uploading File:Global European Union with the UK in a different colour.svg and developing consensus on individual projects to use that. But Commons is not here to make editorial decisions on behalf of other projects, and let's be honest, you're not going to learn the languages of all the projects this file is used on to add explanations for the new legend on all the pages where it's used, are you? —LX (talk, contribs) 06:25, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ThiefOfBagdad, I oppose indicating the UK in a different country until it invokes article 50. Also, this isn't even the place for such a discussion. If you did get consensus here, it wouldn't mean the new file had consensus at Wikipedia. ie, I could just reupload the old version at a new title and it would be the only file with consensus on Wikipedia. Never waste time discussing files here. Just reupload at a different title and take it to Wikipedia. Rob984 (talk) 16:04, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There's an ongoing discussion over on the English Wikipedia. See EN:W:Talk:European Union#Map and Brexit. Rob984 (talk) 21:34, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The UK is a full member of the EU however it should be recognised on the map as a withdrawing state to recognise that it's under article 50 and this should be reflected on the map. (2A02:C7F:5621:2A00:B030:7CC7:77EB:45BC 06:49, 30 March 2017 (UTC))[reply]

The map misleadingly omits the national borders of member states even while showing all national borders of non-member states. I have no doubt that this purposedly indicates the aim of turning the EU into a federal state. As has been noted above, "Wikipedia is not a crystal ball" and as of today, this is still a supra-national union and should be shown as such, compare e.g. File:African Union (orthographic projection).svg.

If for some reason people want to deprive the user of the visual aid of national borders, File:EU Globe No Borders.svg shows no borders (at all). --Dbachmann (talk) 12:59, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would certainly be useful to have both alternatives if we don't already, as we do for e.g. File:EU28-2013 European Union map.svg/File:EU28 as a single entity.svg. As for editorialising on behalf of the 62 individual projects that have already chosen to use this file by overwriting it – let's not. —LX (talk, contribs) 16:46, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have uploaded a version of this map without the UK for use representing the EU-27 and the European Union after the UK's withdrawal. It may also be appropriate to update this map to reflect that map when the UK withdraws, the file can be found here: [[3]]

Yours, --Ethanmayersweet (talk) 03:13, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ethanmayersweet. Thanks, however I decided to make the change to the original file since yours has a slightly different base. This is in order to retain the various changes to this file over the years per COM:OVERWRITE. Rob984 (talk) 01:45, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi everyone. It makes sense that the UK is removed from the countries shaded in green, since it has “left” the EU now. However, in practice there is a transition period where for most purposes EU law still applies to it and treats it like a member for at least (if not extended) the next 11 months. Does anyone agree with me it might make sense to use a special colour for the UK to reflect this status? Obviously, once the UK is properly out, it's out and it would be gray again, but I think it would be helpful to represent the UK specially for now. AJF (talk) 21:12, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]