Second COA[edit]

Would it perhaps be a good idea to have a field for a second coat of arms/emblem for situations where the second flag parameter is also being used?

To give an example of the articles of former colonies: Often the flag and symbols of the colonising nation are official alongside the colony-specific ones. It stands to reason then, in my view; that having the flag and coa of both the imperial nation, as well as the colony in the infobox, would be valuable addition which is not currently possible. LegerityFortis (talk) 21:56, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We have other_symbol parameter. Moxy- 23:10, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Legislature" and "Highest organ of state power"[edit]

Hi

Communist states do not have legislatures, but highest organs of state power. While Western sources often superficially call them legislatures, the constitutions of these states do not. For instance, the Chinese, Soviet and Yugoslav constitutions do not use the term "legislature" at all. The Chinese refer to the National People's Congress as the "highest state organ of power", the Soviet the Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union as the "highest body of state authority", and the Yugoslavs the Assembly as the "supreme organ of power". Per the principle of unified power, all other state organs are organs of the highest organ of state power. That is, the executive branch is an organ of the highest organ of state power, the judiciary is an organ of the highest organ of state power el cetra el cetra. These are not legislatures at least in the liberal sense. More importantly, these states consider them to be something other than legislatures.

What do I want? You have a field called "Legislature". Keep that and add another field called "highest organ of state power", which can be used for the communist state articles. I want these changes to be added to the former country infobox and the ordinary country infobox. --TheUzbek (talk) 11:31, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My parents are still my parents even if they've always called themselves my progenitors.
A legislature is a body (or organ) where laws are made. It's irrelevant what term a particular jurisdiction uses for it. Largoplazo (talk) 11:38, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, that is what a liberal legislature is limited to. However, the powers of the National People's Congress, according to Chinese legal scholar Zhou Fang, "are boundless, its authority extends to the entire territory of the country, and, if necessary, it can intervene in any matter which it finds it requisite to do so."
Do you get the difference now? TheUzbek (talk) 11:42, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would also add this: Chinese legal scholars Xu Chongde and Niu Wenzhan, "[t]he other central State organs are created by the NPC and execute the laws and resolutions made by the NPC."
In a liberal democracy, the legislature is the legislature, and the government is the government. In China, the government and the legislature are the same; the National People's Congress is both (they are both organs of it)! TheUzbek (talk) 11:44, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Democracy index in infobox[edit]

I see that is important to add The Economist Democracy Index to be added. Like how GDP, Gini and HDI shown, Democracy index may be also added to indicate democracy in infobox. May shown as “Democracy Index” in first row, the score (including rank and democratic condition [“Full Democracy”, “Flawed Democracy”, “Hybrid regime” and “Authoritarian” depending on score[1]], year and red/green arrow triangles if democracy changed from previous year. When on previous year remained unchanged it may show blue “hyphen” (similar to HDI, Gini and GDP). If triangle shows to top and is green, it shows more democratic from previous year, and if triangle is red and to bottom, it is goes to autoritarian. Democracy index row may be added to all language editions of Wikipedia.

83.139.28.234 (talk) 17:54, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not seeing a rationale why this index in particular is important to add - there are many that exist. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:01, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Like how GDP, and HDI is imporatant row in Wikipedia country infoboxes, Democracy index is also important, and should be added to infoboxes. 217.76.14.162 (talk) 17:15, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Again, there are many indices out there - why do you feel this one in particular is of equal importance to GDP? Nikkimaria (talk) 06:11, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The “equal” hyphen-line in GDP and HDI means unchanged from last year. 83.139.28.225 (talk) 10:50, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just want to throw in my two cents, but I've also thought about the benefits of adding in some sort of index to the country infobox based on either the V-Dem or EIU indexes.
Currently, on pages for countries such as Russia, Venezuela, Kazakhstan, Belarus, North Korea, Syria, Togo and ecetera, we see the government type listed as a "semi-presidential (or whatever the official government type is)" followed by "under an authoritarian dictatorship" or just "dictatorship" or "authoritarian state" or something like this thereafter. However, other authoritarian countries such as Haiti, Azerbaijan, Palestine, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guinea-Bissau, Yemen, Libya, Iraq, the UAE, and Zimbabwe don't have this identifier. Other socialist authoritarian countries such as China, Cuba, Laos and Vietnam simply state they are a "Unitary Marxist–Leninist one-party socialist republic, but lack the whole "under an authoritarian dictatorship/state" identifier that most other non-Communist authoritarian countries get labeled with.
As far as I can tell there is no reason a country does/does not have the whole "authoritarian" label thrown on at the end. This also brings up an obvious point of concern when authoritarian countries such as Iraq are mentioned as merely a "Federal parliamentary republic," which is also exactly the same as Germany and Austria! Or how Algeria is mentioned as merely a "unitary semi-presidential republic," which is also what France is listed as despite being much more democratic than Algeria.
Rather than having to put "under an authoritarian dictatorship" or such statement in the infobox, it would probably be beneficial to the reader to include one or more democracy indexes to better state the differences between de jure and de facto forms of government. This also might help talk pages with the unending claims of "X country is/isn't a democracy!"
Of course, I also understand the counter-point that the indexes themselves can't be trusted or are biased. However, reliable sources, which Wikipedia itself is based on, generally are in agreement with whether or not a government is authoritarian whether they come from an index or not, so the inclusion of an index would most likely restate what would have already been added in with users putting "under an authoritarian dictatorship" in the first place. BootsED (talk) 06:35, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Full democracies will show dark green in its text; flawed democracies as green; hybrid regimes as orange and authoritarian regimes as red

Template-protected edit request on 11 February 2024[edit]

For the part "ISO 3166 code", I would like to see both the 2-letter and 3-letter codes to be included. Using Pakistan as the example, currently it says: "ISO 3166 code PK", but I would like if it said "ISO 3166 code PK, PAK, 586" since all are valid in ISO 3166.

Currently the 2-letter links to ISO 3166-2:XX for that country. I don't know if the other two could link to something. Since the template automatically supplies with the 2-letter code, it can also supply the other two codes automatically as well. When (({iso3166code))} is manually supplied, the other codes could be supplied through (({iso3166code3))} and (({iso3166numeric))}. 

[REDACTED BROKEN CODE]

Here is a code I've tested and it should work. The checks for code-3 and numeric includes checks if numeric isn't 000, because the module considers the ISO 3166-2:GB codes for some regions of UK to have alpha-3 codes, when no sources say otherwise. If the module could blank out those entries (as I've requested), then this code could be written more elegantly. But the current method should still work for now. Pon Pon the bon bon (talk) 10:10, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please make your changes to Template:Infobox country/sandbox and add a test to Template:Infobox country/testcases — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:33, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for notifying me about those pages. I updated the /sandbox and did notice some errors, so very good that I did that. Particularly regions without a numeric code still gave a comma, and an error in artgument (({iso3166numeric))}. Now ISO 3166 doesn't show up for these non-existing countries: Template:Infobox_country/testcases. Then there's a second page Template:Infobox_country/testcases2 testing ISO for "Bosnia" and it shows up in the intended format. I also tested on Template:Infobox_country/testcases3 to ensure it works as intended for actual articles, and it does.
I hope it's okay I removed the previous code. Here's the new and fixed code:
| label127= [[ISO 3166|ISO 3166 code]]
| data127= ((#switch:(({iso3166code|))}
     |omit = <!--(do nothing)-->
     | = <!--if iso3166code is not supplied:
          -->((#if:(({common_name|))}
              | ((#if:((ISO 3166 code|(({common_name))}|nocat=true))
                 | [[ISO 3166-2:((ISO 3166 code|(({common_name))))}|((ISO 3166 code|(({common_name))))}]]
                ))<!--
                -->((#ifeq:((ISO 3166 numeric|(({common_name))}|nocat=true))|000||((#if:((ISO 3166 code-3|(({common_name))}|nocat=true))
                 | , ((ISO 3166 code-3|(({common_name))))}
                ))))<!--
                -->((#ifeq:((ISO 3166 numeric|(({common_name))}|nocat=true))|000||((#if:((ISO 3166 numeric|(({common_name))}|nocat=true))
                 | , ((ISO 3166 numeric|(({common_name))))}
                ))))
             ))
     |#default = [[ISO 3166-2:((uc:(({iso3166code))))}|((uc:(({iso3166code))))}]]<!--
          -->((#if:(({iso3166code3|))}|, ((uc:(({iso3166code3))))))}<!--
          -->((#if:(({iso3166numeric|))}|, (({iso3166numeric))))}
    ))
Pon Pon the bon bon (talk) 10:22, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
addendum: with the modified Module:ISO 3166/data/National, the code can be simplified as the following. Previous code left in, just in case.
| label127= [[ISO 3166|ISO 3166 code]]
| data127= ((#switch:(({iso3166code|))}
     |omit = <!--(do nothing)-->
     | = <!--if iso3166code is not supplied:
          -->((#if:(({common_name|))}
              | ((#if:((ISO 3166 code|(({common_name))}|nocat=true))
                 | [[ISO 3166-2:((ISO 3166 code|(({common_name))))}|((ISO 3166 code|(({common_name))))}]]
                ))<!--
                -->((#if:((ISO 3166 code-3|(({common_name))}|nocat=true))
                 | , ((ISO 3166 code-3|(({common_name))}
                ))))<!--
                -->((#if:((ISO 3166 numeric|(({common_name))}|nocat=true))
                 | , ((ISO 3166 numeric|(({common_name))}
                ))))
             ))
     |#default = [[ISO 3166-2:((uc:(({iso3166code))))}|((uc:(({iso3166code))))}]]<!--
          -->((#if:(({iso3166code3|))}|, ((uc:(({iso3166code3))))))}<!--
          -->((#if:(({iso3166numeric|))}|, (({iso3166numeric))))}
    ))
Pon Pon the bon bon (talk) 23:35, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 2 March 2024[edit]

Other rank fields are automatically shown in brackets except for HDI rank. Might this be changed for consistency please? Dgp4004 (talk) 15:27, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. SilverLocust 💬 07:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Consistency of years and references[edit]

I've noticed that the layout of year and reference fields is quite inconsistent. I wonder if it's worth giving some thought to how they might be displayed in a more consistent way which would make it easier to read.

For some fields, both year and reference are on the left (ethnic groups, religion).

For some fields, year is on the left and the reference is on the right (HDI, Gini).

For some fields, both year and reference are on the right (GDP).

For some fields, the year is on the left and there isn't a reference field—it's up to editors whether they put it on the left or the right (population).

My own thoughts are that ethnic groups and religion have it right—the year and reference look most elegant and readable on the left. I think that the settlement infobox handles refs and headings quite well as here: Tameside. Dgp4004 (talk) 23:59, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Categories