This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Politics Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was selected as the article for improvement on 29 July 2013 for a period of one week.

isnt the former USSR an example? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.237.54.62 (talk) 03:47, 2 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_empire — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.220.49.202 (talk) 05:14, 13 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is EU a political union, or just a form of economic union?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 00:50, 3 February 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

i'd say its just an economic union for now

The European Parliament my disagree. 68.148.123.76 (talk) 11:26, 28 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Isn't the USA an example? Or is being a confederation completely different to a political union? -Tene 22:10, 1 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The USA is a federation. Wouter Lievens 12:36, 4 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What about the relationship between the USA and the Compact of Free Association nations of the Marshall Islands,the Federated States of Micronesia, and Palau, as well as the Northern Mariana Islands. Would these nations be considers as having a political union with the United States? -24.149.203.34 (talk) 21:08, 17 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've removed the category political science form this article, because it has no or little links to political science, it should be in (a subcat) of politics, not political science. Furthermore Serbia & Montenegro is no longer a country and the United Kingdom is devolved state and not a political union. user:Mais oui! reverted my edits without explanation, I'm reverting it. C mon 00:00, 3 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

the UK is not yet a fully devolved state, the scots welsh and (hopefully soon) northern irish, have less power than an american state and are still subordinate to westminster on a number of issues Joevsimp 10:33, 27 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Commonwealth Confederation should be added to this list. Several options have been proposed, however the UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand is the usual list of potential members. Other options include all members of the Commonwealth Realm, or all memebers of the Commonwealth of Nations. Some lists include non-Commonwealth areas such as Ireland, The USA, and Israel.68.148.123.76 (talk) 10:36, 28 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think that the so-called "Commonwealth Confederation" should include the current and former colonies of the United States, if they include the U.S.--Ieph (talk) 21:56, 13 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've never heard of this proposed Commonwealth Confed. I'd totally support that! Where do I sign? CANZUK! Oh yeah. Sorry, not helpful. There's not an article on it. I found stuff on Google tho. Should it be created? Night w (talk) 03:44, 30 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ooops, it think people have gotten carried away here. Under a heading saying that there are/have been irrendentist movements to re-unite these countries, we get a series of links leading articles that only say that these countries were linked at one point in history, NOT that there are active movements to reunite them. This is not the same thing. I have asked for citations that some of these movements actually exist/have existed. Some of those highlighted are pretty far-fetched (Anglo-Irish? Trans-Caucasian? Really?) Indisciplined (talk) 20:09, 23 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This entire section is completely unsourced and I doubt its relevance. The first sentence does not represent the content (EU irredentist/nationalistic?!). I also agree with the previous comment, but I think the confusion comes from including the content here (most wikilinks are dubious too, eg linking simply to a country). I was going to propose a split in a different article, but that would have to be trimmed too, although maybe it is worth a try; otherwise I am in favour of completely removing this section from this article. Antipastor (talk) 18:38, 28 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Speaking of far-fetched...why are the Congos in there? Just because the two countries share the same name (because of the river), doesn't mean their citizens are even thinking about a union. I removed it. Night w (talk) 03:44, 30 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I found some "not so clear" sources, but looks like some people support the idea of the "Only One Congo". They share the same people, some traditions and native language (not talking about French), and the two capitals have close relations. I didn't put it back on the list because I'm still looking for reliable sources, but if someone find it (or would like to contribute on the discussion), be welcome. Regards. Gvogas (talk) 17:10, 27 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This article cites that the Chinese Reunification took place in 1949. While in 1912 reunification did occur, 1949 was when the Nationalists separated from the PRC and moved to Taiwan. I would not call this a reunification because while the PRC maintains nominal control of the island of Taiwan, the ROC is the defacto government of Taiwan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.75.137.56 (talk) 20:43, 23 November 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Spain (process from 1037 to 1479) — however the realms of the Crown of Aragon were formally separate from the Crown of Castile were not administratively unified with Castile until 1716 and 1833 respectively.

What two realms would that be? Aragon and Valencia? —Tamfang (talk) 08:01, 23 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

. 223.184.183.112 (talk) 02:52, 22 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've added a "dubious" tag to the assertion from Ryan that all cases of voluntary unification since the early 19th century were between states that spoke the same language. Three counter-examples which come to mind: Switzerland (1848 - German, French, Romansh); Canada (1867 - French and English); Italy (1871 - variety of regional languages). I don't have access to the Ryan article, so not sure how to review this point? Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 15:11, 22 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]