 | This template is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations 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.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles | | | Template | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. |
|
 | This template is within the scope of WikiProject Travel and Tourism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of travel and tourism related articles 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.Travel and TourismWikipedia:WikiProject Travel and TourismTemplate:WikiProject Travel and TourismTourism articles | | | Template | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. |
|
I feel there are some issues with the separation of the Schengen countries from other countries. Now the Schengen countries do not link to a visa policy article but to the country article, which I think is not very helpful. Moreover, several countries follow schengen policy by EU-law (bulgaria et al) and might be better suited there... Shall I try to i) rearrange and iia) non-link the Schengen countries or iib) link all schengen countries to the European Union visa lists page? L.tak (talk) 17:40, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
- sorry, this should have been at Template:Visa policy by country; I have copied it in there... L.tak (talk) 06:06, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
I think that all of the List of passports and missing passports should be present in the template here (including the passport/citizenship-types that do not correspond to a particular territory - SMOM, British National (Overseas), British Subject, etc.)
I recently added Kosovo, but there are others missing. Alinor (talk) 14:41, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
Why are the entries in this template grouped by region? It seems to me that a user would come to this template with a particular country in mind, not a region (and they may not even be sure what region the country falls into), so a simple alphabetical listing would be more helpful. Colonies Chris (talk) 19:56, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
- You are right. It's even worse now. The regions are divided in subregions. It makes navigation hard by adding extra step. How should people know to look in "Central Africa" for Angola and it's more central located neighbour Zambia in "Eastern Africa".Randam (talk) 04:02, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
United States should be listes as "American". Every nationality is represented by its demonym except the US.Correctron (talk) 01:14, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Hello. What are your thoughts on the grouping of European countries? - EU/other Europe compared to geographic grouping for the other regions.
I recently added EFTA as a European group, but it was then removed by Norvikk. As long as EU countries are grouped together in this template, it feels like EFTA countries should be too. I understand that EFTA is not a union like the EU, but as this template is about visa requirements that shouldn’t make a difference. Other countries impose different visa requirements on citizens from different EU countries, and there is no uniform visa policy in the EU. Some are part of the Schengen area, UK and Ireland have their own travel area, and some of the newer members maintain their own visa policies.
While all EFTA countries has the same visa policy towards other countries (all part of the EUs Schengen area), they all gets reciprocity from the same countries. And hence, the visa requirements imposed on EFTA citizens should actually be more similar to each other than those of imposed on citizens from EU countries. Also, to say that the EFTA countries have an open border with the Schengen area is simply wrong, as all EFTA states are *members* of Schengen. Other countries, like Andorra is not a member of Schengen but has chosen to have an open border.
If the template should group European countries after union/organizational memberships etc, it would make more sense to group countries with a common visa policy, such as Schengen countries together (reciprocity is negotiated to be given all Schengen members). The most logical to me would be to group European countries after geography like the other regions/continents. I can't see how a divide between EU and other Europe make senses when it comes to visa requirements, as other countries impose different visa requirements on countries within the EU.
Megyeye (talk) 13:37, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
- Hello. I have removed your editing.
- Visa requirements table. Table by citizenship. The European Union has a separate column because it has Citizenship of the European Union. EFTA is economic union. And CARICOM Single Market and Economy, Central American Common Market, Eurasian Economic Union, Mercosur, Gulf Cooperation Council too. You want them to allocate in a separate column too?
- Visa policy table. The table has the column EU/EFTA because have the general visa space "Schengen Area".
- In my opinion, the division into economic unions superfluous in VR table. Thanks. --Norvikk (talk) 13:59, 21 March 2017
(UTC)
- I am not sure if Mercosur etc have a common visa policy, like Schengen. But, no, I don't believe they should. I don't see why the EU should have a column for that matter. Visa requirements imposed on EU citizens seems to be imposed on the background of their respective national citizenship. And hence visa requirements imposed on citizens from different EU countries differs. As reciprocity in visa requirements is negotiated on behalf of Schengen membership i think it would make more sense to group Schengen countries together than EU countries together when it comes to a visa policy table - if countries are to be be grouped after something else than location/geography. The table is fine with me the way it is, I asked the initial question because, as you say "In my opinion, the division into economic unions superfluous in VR table".
- Sorry. I think Visa requirements for EFTA nationals article does not make sense. I guess the Article and links to it should be removed. --Norvikk (talk) 14:05, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
I agree with Norvikk. There is no such thing as EFTA citizenship (even though Norwegian, Icelandic, Swiss citizens are granted similar rights in practice through a series of contracts).--Twofortnights (talk) 21:13, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
