Talk:Dependent territory/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Jan Mayen

Hi,

I would think that Jan Mayen would be listed here, as it is an unincorporated area given the same status as Svalbard, which is listed here. Is there any specific reason for this, or has it just not been added yet?

Thanks.

TheRealGrantma (talk) 22:17, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

See Talk:Dependent territory/Archive 2#Jan Mayen. TFD (talk) 22:54, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

I've added the source mentioned there, which discusses the difference, into the article. CMD (talk) 03:45, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

So how is Svalbard different from Scotland or Australia's Northern Territory? Is there a specific distance it must be from the state to meet our article's criteria to be a dependent territory rather than an internal territory? Why isn't Hawaii listed? It's thousands of miles away from the U.S. mainland, the U.S. government reported it as a non-self-governing territory even after it became an incorporated territory, it has self-government and under international law has a right to self-determination. TFD (talk) 05:12, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

I understand the questions are somewhat rhetorical, but Svalbard is currently included in the similar entities section, so there is some distinction. I wish there were better sources as well. CMD (talk) 06:07, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

The argument for including Svalbard is that Norwegian sovereignty is limited. But that applies to many territories acquired by treaty. When the U.S. gained its independence, it retained the right to fish in Newfoundland, which continues today. Under another treaty, the U.S. is not allowed to sail battleships in the Great Lakes. Hawaii and Quebec have a right to self-determination under international law. Federal nations such as Canada and the U.S. have either ceded or never extinguished rights of constituent states. I'm sure there are lots of other anomalies. The list of similar entities will always be subjective. TFD (talk) 03:38, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Near as I can tell, the main justification for why Svalbard was still included here (at the exclusion of say Jan Mayen, since both are prevalent throughout sources) was becase of the arbitrary statement in the leed of including entries of "special position guaranteed by an international treaty". It is the same reason why we still include Hong Kong and Macau (PRC treaty with UK), as well as the reason why the totally unsourced Åland Islands are included (demilitarised since the end of the Crimean War/Åland War). - Wiz9999 (talk) 13:19, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

There must be dozens of territories that are subject to international treaties. I just provided one example, Newfoundland, which incidentally once was an independent country and is separated from the Canadian mainland, although it has territory in Quebec.

TheRealGrantma, both Svalberg and Jan Mayen were incorporated into Norway when they were acquired.

TFD (talk) 14:03, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Both Jan Mayen and Svalbard shouldn't be included in the list. The only Norwegian territory which can be considered a dependency is the uninhabited Bouvet Island. 120.16.24.243 (talk) 00:33, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Under what justification/reasoning do you also make this statement? - Wiz9999 (talk) 21:06, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Åland?

Why on earth is Åland included in the list? It is an internal administrative region of Finland with a special status. A lot of countries have these types of administrative division. For example, Jeju Island of South Korea, Gilgit-Baltistan and Azad Kashmir of Pakistan, the Kurdistan Region of Iraq, Easter Island of Chile, Karakalpakstan of Uzbekistan, Xinjiang, Tibet, and Inner Mongolia of China, the Chatham Islands of New Zealand, the Azores and Madeira of Portugal, and Zanzibar of Tanzania etc. Should we include them all? 120.16.24.243 (talk) 01:05, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

The article currently has a provision for including entities who have a "special position" guarenteed by international treaty. I believe the original justification for including Åland within the article relate to the international treaty that helped establish Åland (See here: Åland War#Ending of the war and Treaty of Paris (1856)#Provisions). However, I will point out it is completely unrepresented in all of our most prominent reliable sources. - Wiz9999 (talk) 21:19, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Outlying island territories of the United States

Source: https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:code:3166:US

According to the ISO official website, all outlying island territories of the United States are considered intergal parts of the country (even though most of them are unincorporated). The UN and the ISO do not recognise these offshore islands as dependencies of the US. Should we move the United States section to "Lists of similar entities" instead? 120.16.24.243 (talk) 13:37, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

That is not the purpose or meaning of the ISO codes. Note how American Samoa, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands are included in that ISO page, but are also listed on the official UN list of non-self-governing territories. CMD (talk) 13:50, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

My understanding is that a place need to be inhabited in order to qualify as a dependency. That's why American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands are considered dependencies while the United States Minor Outlying Islands aren't. 04:27, 24 February 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment by 144.130.162.86

Or it could be that the minor islands have no legal personality. TFD (talk) 04:54, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Lots of uninhabited places can be considered dependencies, Bouvet Island and the BIOT are the most classic examples of this type of dependency. Most of the time these places are just ignored though, since without people present there is no need for representation, despite these places having a legal distinction equivalent to that of other inhabited dependent territories (The United States Minor Outlying Islands are a convention more than a distinct legal entity, as they group several dependent territories together). - Wiz9999 (talk) 12:24, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

These uninhabited islands are overseas territories instead of dependent territories. They have no local government, therefore there is no dependent relationship between them and their administering state. Whether they are classified as individual territories or as a group of territories won't change their status. 120.17.162.237 (talk) 08:59, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Under U.S. law, they are not an integral part of the U.S.--they are neither part of a state, nor a federal district such as DC (nor part thereof), nor an incorporated territory such as Palmyra (nor a part thereof). By the definition provided in the article, they are dependent territories. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 13:01, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Inclusion criteria

Some of the current entries in the "Lists of dependent territories" shouldn't be included. I think it's time for us to draft an inclusion criteria for this article. My suggestion is that we should use the United Nations M49 list and the United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories. The M49 list includes all sovereign states and self-governing/non-self-governing territories recognised by the UN. The other list includes non-self-governing territories (dependent territories) only.

For our article, all those self-governing territories should be included in the "Lists of similar entities" instead. 120.16.24.243 (talk) 01:16, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

I agree with coming up with easy to understand inclusion criteria for this article. As I've previously commented, however, it's more important for this article to have an easy to understand, well sourced DEFINITION of 'dependent territory', something it still lacks, before we decide what is and isn't dependent. A read of this comment section over the past few months alone shows that we really haven't pinned this down yet. I also am coming round to thinking we should *completely abolish the 'similar entities' section, as being original research*. If they're not dependent, they're not dependent. ҉ Randwicked ҉ 07:49, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

To the extent there may be original research, it is in the split, not in the entries of the similar entities section. The original sources this page developed from, years ago, such as the CIA World Factbook, just had single lists. CMD (talk) 13:02, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm going to re-post my table of RS's (now updated) from the previous section (Why are the Australian external territories here) from this talk page. I have updated it now with columns for entries from the UN M49 nations list and the UN non-self-governing list as well as re-listing the entries from the newly updated CIA worldfactbook website (which underwent a major overhaul in January 2021):

	CIA World Factbook "Dependent areas":		CIA World Factbook "Dependency status":		US Department of State Dependencies and AoSS:	EU Annex A5 List:	1998 UN M49 List:	UN Non-Self-Governing Territories:	Present in all lists:	Present in lists other than UN Non-Self-Governing Territories:	Present in lists other than two UN lists:	Not in References, but presently within article:
	October 2020	Current	October 2020	Current	Current	Current	Current	Current
1			Akrotiri	Akrotiri	Akrotiri
2			Dhekelia	Dhekelia	Dhekelia
3	American Samoa	American Samoa	American Samoa	American Samoa	American Samoa	American Samoa	American Samoa	American Samoa	American Samoa	American Samoa	American Samoa
4	Anguilla	Anguilla	Anguilla	Anguilla	Anguilla	Anguilla	Anguilla	Anguilla	Anguilla	Anguilla	Anguilla
5					"Antarctica"	"Antarctica"
6	Aruba	Aruba	Aruba	Aruba	Aruba	Aruba	Aruba			Aruba	Aruba
7	Ashmore and Cartier Islands	Ashmore and Cartier Islands	Ashmore and Cartier Islands	Ashmore and Cartier Islands	Ashmore and Cartier Islands
8	Baker Island	Baker Island			Baker Island
9	Bermuda	Bermuda	Bermuda	Bermuda	Bermuda	Bermuda	Bermuda	Bermuda	Bermuda	Bermuda	Bermuda
10	Bouvet Island	Bouvet Island	Bouvet Island	Bouvet Island	Bouvet Island	Bouvet Island					Bouvet Island
11	British Indian Ocean Territory	British Indian Ocean Territory	British Indian Ocean Territory	British Indian Ocean Territory	British Indian Ocean Territory	British Indian Ocean Territory					British Indian Ocean Territory
12	British Virgin Islands	British Virgin Islands	British Virgin Islands	British Virgin Islands	British Virgin Islands	British Virgin Islands	British Virgin Islands	British Virgin Islands	British Virgin Islands	British Virgin Islands	British Virgin Islands
13	Cayman Islands	Cayman Islands	Cayman Islands	Cayman Islands	Cayman Islands	Cayman Islands	Cayman Islands	Cayman Islands	Cayman Islands	Cayman Islands	Cayman Islands
14							"Channel Islands"*
15	Christmas Island	Christmas Island	Christmas Island	Christmas Island	Christmas Island	Christmas Island					Christmas Island
16	Clipperton	Clipperton	Clipperton	Clipperton	Clipperton	Clipperton					Clipperton
17	Cocos (Keeling) Islands	Cocos (Keeling) Islands	Cocos (Keeling) Islands	Cocos (Keeling) Islands	Cocos (Keeling) Islands	Cocos (Keeling) Islands					Cocos (Keeling) Islands
18	Cook Islands	Cook Islands	Cook Islands	Cook Islands	Cook Islands	Cook Islands*	Cook Islands*			Cook Islands	Cook Islands
19	Coral Sea Islands	Coral Sea Islands	Coral Sea Islands	Coral Sea Islands	Coral Sea Islands
20	Curaçao	Curaçao	Curaçao	Curaçao	Curaçao	Curaçao					Curaçao
21	Falkland Islands	Falkland Islands	Falkland Islands	Falkland Islands	Falkland Islands	Falkland Islands	Falkland Islands	Falkland Islands	Falkland Islands	Falkland Islands	Falkland Islands
22			Faroe Islands	Faroe Islands	Faroe Islands	Faroe Islands	Faroe Islands
23					French Guiana	French Guiana	French Guiana
24	French Polynesia	French Polynesia	French Polynesia	French Polynesia	French Polynesia	French Polynesia	French Polynesia	French Polynesia	French Polynesia	French Polynesia	French Polynesia
25	French Southern and Antarctic Lands	French Southern and Antarctic Lands	French Southern and Antarctic Lands	French Southern and Antarctic Lands	French Southern and Antarctic Lands	French Southern and Antarctic Lands					French Southern and Antarctic Lands
26	Gibraltar	Gibraltar	Gibraltar	Gibraltar	Gibraltar	Gibraltar	Gibraltar	Gibraltar	Gibraltar	Gibraltar	Gibraltar
27			Greenland	Greenland	Greenland	Greenland	Greenland
28					Guadeloupe	Guadeloupe	Guadeloupe
29	Guam	Guam	Guam	Guam	Guam	Guam	Guam	Guam	Guam	Guam	Guam
30			Guernsey	Guernsey	Guernsey	Guernsey*
31	Heard Island and McDonald Islands	Heard Island and McDonald Islands	Heard Island and McDonald Islands	Heard Island and McDonald Islands	Heard Island and McDonald Islands	Heard Island and McDonald Islands					Heard Island and McDonald Islands
32			Hong Kong	Hong Kong	Hong Kong	Hong Kong	Hong Kong
33	Howland Island	Howland Island	Howland Island		Howland Island
34			Isle of Man	Isle of Man	Isle of Man	Isle of Man*	Isle of Man*
35	Jarvis Island	Jarvis Island	Jarvis Island		Jarvis Island
36			Jersey	Jersey	Jersey	Jersey*
37	Johnston Atoll	Johnston Atoll	Johnston Atoll		Johnston Atoll
38	Kingman Reef	Kingman Reef	Kingman Reef		Kingman Reef
39			Macau	Macau	Macau	Macau	Macau
40					Martinique	Martinique	Martinique
41					Mayotte	Mayotte
42	Midway Islands	Midway Islands	Midway Islands		Midway Islands
43	Montserrat	Montserrat	Montserrat	Montserrat	Montserrat	Montserrat	Montserrat	Montserrat	Montserrat	Montserrat	Montserrat
44	Navassa Island	Navassa Island	Navassa Island	Navassa Island	Navassa Island
45							Netherlands Antilles
46	New Caledonia	New Caledonia	New Caledonia	New Caledonia	New Caledonia	New Caledonia	New Caledonia	New Caledonia	New Caledonia	New Caledonia	New Caledonia
47	Niue	Niue	Niue	Niue	Niue	Niue*	Niue*			Niue	Niue
48	Norfolk Island	Norfolk Island	Norfolk Island	Norfolk Island	Norfolk Island	Norfolk Island	Norfolk Island			Norfolk Island	Norfolk Island
49	Northern Mariana Islands	Northern Mariana Islands	Northern Mariana Islands	Northern Mariana Islands	Northern Mariana Islands	Northern Mariana Islands	Northern Mariana Islands			Northern Mariana Islands	Northern Mariana Islands
50							"Occupied Palestinian Territory"*
51	Palmyra Atoll	Palmyra Atoll	Palmyra Atoll		Palmyra Atoll
52					Paracel Islands
53	Pitcairn Islands	Pitcairn Islands	Pitcairn Islands	Pitcairn Islands	Pitcairn Islands	Pitcairn Islands	Pitcairn Islands	Pitcairn Islands	Pitcairn Islands	Pitcairn Islands	Pitcairn Islands
54	Puerto Rico	Puerto Rico	Puerto Rico	Puerto Rico	Puerto Rico	Puerto Rico	Puerto Rico			Puerto Rico	Puerto Rico
55					Réunion	Réunion	Réunion
56	Saint Barthélemy	Saint Barthélemy	Saint Barthélemy	Saint Barthélemy	Saint Barthélemy	Saint Barthélemy					Saint Barthélemy
57	Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha	Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha	Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha	Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha	Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha	Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha	Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha	Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha	Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha	Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha	Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha
58	Saint Martin	Saint Martin	Saint Martin	Saint Martin	Saint Martin	Saint Martin					Saint Martin
59	Saint Pierre and Miquelon	Saint Pierre and Miquelon	Saint Pierre and Miquelon	Saint Pierre and Miquelon	Saint Pierre and Miquelon	Saint Pierre and Miquelon	Saint Pierre and Miquelon			Saint Pierre and Miquelon	Saint Pierre and Miquelon
60	Sint Maarten	Sint Maarten	Sint Maarten	Sint Maarten	Sint Maarten	Sint Maarten					Sint Maarten
61	South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands	South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands	South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands	South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands	South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands	South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands					South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands
62					Spratly Islands
63	Svalbard	Svalbard	Svalbard	Svalbard	Svalbard	Svalbard & Jan Mayen	Svalbard & Jan Mayen			Svalbard	Svalbard
64	Jan Mayen	Jan Mayen	Jan Mayen	Jan Mayen	Jan Mayen					Jan Mayen	Jan Mayen
65							"Taiwan Province of China"*
66	Tokelau	Tokelau	Tokelau	Tokelau	Tokelau	Tokelau	Tokelau	Tokelau	Tokelau	Tokelau	Tokelau
67	Turks and Caicos Islands	Turks and Caicos Islands	Turks and Caicos Islands	Turks and Caicos Islands	Turks and Caicos Islands	Turks and Caicos Islands	Turks and Caicos Islands	Turks and Caicos Islands	Turks and Caicos Islands	Turks and Caicos Islands	Turks and Caicos Islands
68						"US Minor Outlying Islands"
69			"US Pacific Island Wildlife Refuges"	"US Pacific Island Wildlife Refuges"
70	US Virgin Islands	US Virgin Islands	US Virgin Islands	US Virgin Islands	US Virgin Islands	US Virgin Islands	US Virgin Islands	US Virgin Islands	US Virgin Islands	US Virgin Islands	US Virgin Islands
71	Wake Island	Wake Island	Wake Island	Wake Island	Wake Island
72	Wallis and Futuna	Wallis and Futuna	Wallis and Futuna	Wallis and Futuna	Wallis and Futuna	Wallis and Futuna	Wallis and Futuna			Wallis and Futuna	Wallis and Futuna
73					Western Sahara	Western Sahara	Western Sahara*	Western Sahara
74												Åland
75												Australian Antartic Territory
76												British Antartic Territory
77												Peter I Island
78												Queen Maud Land
79												Ross Dependency
80												Bajo Nuevo Bank
81												Serranilla Bank

* Entries marked with an asterisk in either the Annex A5 list and the M49 list mark where entries are not clearly identified as 'dependent territories', but potentially as independent states/countries.

The UN M49 list does not in any way distinguish between those states that are independent from dependent territories within its list. This is problematic to use it as a source for this article since some territories are considered 'independent' under certain circumstances and considered 'dependent' under other circumstances (most notable examples of this are Niue and the Cook Islands). The UN M49 list is also woefully out of date and is listing entries such as the Netherlands Antilles which hasn't existed as a political entity for more than a decade now. Additionally, no uninhabited territories are listed for either the UN M49 list or the UN Non-Self-Governing list. This is either by intention, or simply due to the fact that the UN does not consider these unpopulated areas as important under any capacity. This causes a problem for us to utilise the two references as sources, since we simply do not know if uninhabited territories are specifically excluded deliberately or not, despite legal equivalence within an administering state. For example, consider the UK's British Overseas Territories, each of which have a legally equivalent association with the UK, (e.g. Saint Helena [populated], South Georgia [no population], and BIOT [only a military population]) yet only Saint Helena is on the two UN lists. The UN Non-Self-Governing list is especially problematic as it has the explicit intention of highlighting territories that UN deems are pending decolonisation via some manner. Thus, it is a very POV list. Yes, all the entries on the UN Non-Self-Governing list are most certainly dependent, but the list (by design) is hardly encompassing of ALL dependent territories, and is thus a pretty poor source to be used for this article. Consequently, I have made the table again, excluding these two problematic sources. I have also grouped certain related entries together, in order to show how we could potentially change the article to represent the information from the sources better:

			CIA World Factbook "Dependent areas":	CIA World Factbook "Dependency status":	US Department of State Dependencies and AoSS:	EU Annex A5 List:	Present in these lists:	Not in References, but presently within article:
			Current	Current	Current	Current
5	"Antarctica"				"Antarctica"	"Antarctica"
75								Australian Antartic Territory
76								British Antartic Territory
77								Peter I Island
78								Queen Maud Land
79								Ross Dependency
68	"US Minor Outlying Islands"					"US Minor Outlying Islands"
42			Midway Islands		Midway Islands
44			Navassa Island	Navassa Island	Navassa Island		Navassa Island (Inc. as part of USMOI)
69		"US Pacific Island Wildlife Refuges"		"US Pacific Island Wildlife Refuges"			("US Pacific Island Wildlife Refuges")
8			Baker Island		Baker Island		Baker Island (Inc. as part of USMOI or USPIWR)
33			Howland Island		Howland Island		Howland Island (Inc. as part of USMOI or USPIWR)
35			Jarvis Island		Jarvis Island		Jarvis Island (Inc. as part of USMOI or USPIWR)
37			Johnston Atoll		Johnston Atoll		Johnston Atoll (Inc. as part of USMOI or USPIWR)
38			Kingman Reef		Kingman Reef		Kingman Reef (Inc. as part of USMOI or USPIWR)
51			Palmyra Atoll		Palmyra Atoll		Palmyra Atoll (Inc. as part of USMOI or USPIWR)
71			Wake Island	Wake Island	Wake Island		Wake Island (Inc. as part of USMOI or USPIWR)
63	Svalbard & Jan Mayen		Svalbard	Svalbard	Svalbard	Svalbard & Jan Mayen	Svalbard
64			Jan Mayen	Jan Mayen	Jan Mayen		Jan Mayen
1	Akrotiri & Dhekelia			Akrotiri	Akrotiri
2				Dhekelia	Dhekelia
3			American Samoa	American Samoa	American Samoa	American Samoa	American Samoa
4			Anguilla	Anguilla	Anguilla	Anguilla	Anguilla
6			Aruba	Aruba	Aruba	Aruba	Aruba
7			Ashmore and Cartier Islands	Ashmore and Cartier Islands	Ashmore and Cartier Islands
9			Bermuda	Bermuda	Bermuda	Bermuda	Bermuda
10			Bouvet Island	Bouvet Island	Bouvet Island	Bouvet Island	Bouvet Island
11			British Indian Ocean Territory	British Indian Ocean Territory	British Indian Ocean Territory	British Indian Ocean Territory	British Indian Ocean Territory
12			British Virgin Islands	British Virgin Islands	British Virgin Islands	British Virgin Islands	British Virgin Islands
13			Cayman Islands	Cayman Islands	Cayman Islands	Cayman Islands	Cayman Islands
15			Christmas Island	Christmas Island	Christmas Island	Christmas Island	Christmas Island
16			Clipperton	Clipperton	Clipperton	Clipperton	Clipperton
17			Cocos (Keeling) Islands	Cocos (Keeling) Islands	Cocos (Keeling) Islands	Cocos (Keeling) Islands	Cocos (Keeling) Islands
18			Cook Islands	Cook Islands	Cook Islands	Cook Islands*	Cook Islands
19			Coral Sea Islands	Coral Sea Islands	Coral Sea Islands
20			Curaçao	Curaçao	Curaçao	Curaçao	Curaçao
21			Falkland Islands	Falkland Islands	Falkland Islands	Falkland Islands	Falkland Islands
22				Faroe Islands	Faroe Islands	Faroe Islands
23					French Guiana	French Guiana
24			French Polynesia	French Polynesia	French Polynesia	French Polynesia	French Polynesia
25			French Southern and Antarctic Lands	French Southern and Antarctic Lands	French Southern and Antarctic Lands	French Southern and Antarctic Lands	French Southern and Antarctic Lands
26			Gibraltar	Gibraltar	Gibraltar	Gibraltar	Gibraltar
27				Greenland	Greenland	Greenland
28					Guadeloupe	Guadeloupe
29			Guam	Guam	Guam	Guam	Guam
30				Guernsey	Guernsey	Guernsey*
31			Heard Island and McDonald Islands	Heard Island and McDonald Islands	Heard Island and McDonald Islands	Heard Island and McDonald Islands	Heard Island and McDonald Islands
32				Hong Kong	Hong Kong	Hong Kong
34				Isle of Man	Isle of Man	Isle of Man*
36				Jersey	Jersey	Jersey*
39				Macau	Macau	Macau
40					Martinique	Martinique
41					Mayotte	Mayotte
43			Montserrat	Montserrat	Montserrat	Montserrat	Montserrat
46			New Caledonia	New Caledonia	New Caledonia	New Caledonia	New Caledonia
47			Niue	Niue	Niue	Niue*	Niue
48			Norfolk Island	Norfolk Island	Norfolk Island	Norfolk Island	Norfolk Island
49			Northern Mariana Islands	Northern Mariana Islands	Northern Mariana Islands	Northern Mariana Islands	Northern Mariana Islands
53			Pitcairn Islands	Pitcairn Islands	Pitcairn Islands	Pitcairn Islands	Pitcairn Islands
54			Puerto Rico	Puerto Rico	Puerto Rico	Puerto Rico	Puerto Rico
55					Réunion	Réunion
56			Saint Barthélemy	Saint Barthélemy	Saint Barthélemy	Saint Barthélemy	Saint Barthélemy
57			Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha	Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha	Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha	Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha	Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha
58			Saint Martin	Saint Martin	Saint Martin	Saint Martin	Saint Martin
59			Saint Pierre and Miquelon	Saint Pierre and Miquelon	Saint Pierre and Miquelon	Saint Pierre and Miquelon	Saint Pierre and Miquelon
60			Sint Maarten	Sint Maarten	Sint Maarten	Sint Maarten	Sint Maarten
61			South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands	South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands	South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands	South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands	South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands
66			Tokelau	Tokelau	Tokelau	Tokelau	Tokelau
67			Turks and Caicos Islands	Turks and Caicos Islands	Turks and Caicos Islands	Turks and Caicos Islands	Turks and Caicos Islands
70			US Virgin Islands	US Virgin Islands	US Virgin Islands	US Virgin Islands	US Virgin Islands
72			Wallis and Futuna	Wallis and Futuna	Wallis and Futuna	Wallis and Futuna	Wallis and Futuna
52	Disputed Lands / Multiple Occupants				Paracel Islands
62					Spratly Islands
73					Western Sahara	Western Sahara
74								Åland
80								Bajo Nuevo Bank
81								Serranilla Bank

The inclusion criteria ultimately would have to be based on referenced sources in one way or another. So far, these four sources are the most directly relatable we have for "dependent territories"/"dependent areas"/"dependencies" to be included in this article. Even though a firm definition of "dependent territory" still eludes us in the available RS's. However, it is notable that some of the entries we currently have within the article are not directly reflected within these handful of available sources. Essentially, they all correspond with claimed territory, either in Antarctica or the two US island territories within the Caribbean (with the exception of Åland which is the only actually directly controlled territory not reflected in any of our sources). We may continue to list these entries, but the manner by which they are listed will need to be spelled out quite specifically in the inclusion criteria. The Antarctic claims are not directly referenced in the sources provided, but the overall category of "Antarctica" is included in at least two of the sources. The uninhabited island territories of the US are generally listed in all the sources, either directly or dually listed under one of the two categories of "US Pacific Island Wildlife Refuges" and "US Minor Outlying Islands". I feel there is some justification there to merge all of these entries into one (or both) of these terms as a result, seeing as this is reflected overall in the sources (with the notable exception of the sourced UN lists, which do not include any uninhabited territories).

Entities within the sources that are not currently associated with an entry on the article (in one form or another) consist only of: (64) Jan Mayen, (23) French Guiana, (28) Guadeloupe, (40) Martinique, (41) Mayotte, (55) Réunion, (52) Paracel Islands, (62) Spratly Islands, (73) Western Sahara, (50) "Occupied Palestinian Territory", and (65) "Taiwan Province of China". Of these, the French territories are totally internal to France and have been excluded from the list previously for that reason alone, Jan Mayen there have been numerous and continuing discussions about, and the remaining 5 entries all are areas of conflict and dispute that have multiple states/entities controlling them and/or are states with limited recognition. Regardless of what is decided for the French areas and Jan Mayen (when/if we draw up the criteria for this article), I feel very strongly that we should avoid the criteria permitting the inclusion of these dependencies/areas under circumstances involving general conflict/dispute, as they are all problematic existing entries in their nature (Western Sahara, Palestine, Taiwan, South China Sea islands, etc.) regardless of what is described in sources. This should be a key point in the criteria, as it will avoid many issues with editors coming in here and POV pushing for the inclusion of one territory or another (e.g. all the recent discussions over inclusion of Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan that was brought up by one editor in particular). I think the inclusion criteria must be very clear about excluding entities that could be considered states with limited recognition and entities where there is no overall clear controlling state, due to dispute. - Wiz9999 (talk) 20:47, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

As I said before, this is original research. International law does not distinguish between sovereign states and their dependencies, it's purely a matter of domestic law. And it takes expertise to determine that Taiwan, Aland and Jersey all belong in a category. TFD (talk) 01:14, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Hence the need for more formal criteria than we already have present in the article. We are not going to get away from the OR issue, as we can't locate a singular agreed upon definition of "dependent territory". However, we can mitigate against it by creating article specific criteria. Additionally, we will maintain the overall NPOV of the article with such criteria. - Wiz9999 (talk) 04:48, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Of course, we could always just select one of the RS's and dogmatically stick to it, no matter what it says, to avoid the OR issue altogether. However, how do we choose between them? The main point I was trying to make by generating the comparison tables above was that there are significant differences between the RS's. Choosing one to fanatically stick to won't be easy, and we will be compromising the article's NPOV. @The Four Deuces Overall you are not really making an argument about a general WP:OR issue per say, but about the WP:SYNTH issues relating to us using multiple RS's/combining the RS's to make a generalised WP:NPOV list, which is a form of OR. - Wiz9999 (talk) 05:31, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Wiz9999. Do any of these sources actually DEFINE what they mean by dependency? Also, the CIA and EU style guide are STILL sadly inaccurate in calling Norfolk Island a self-governing territory, which makes me wonder how well researched these supposed reliable sources are in other ways. Surely either organisation could have put an intern on fixing this years-long error by now. It'd take them 5 minutes. ҉ Randwicked ҉ 07:07, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Agreed, it is frustrating that the RS's list territories that are clearly more integrated into their parent states than other listed dependent territories. Norfolk Island and the French overseas departments and regions (French Guiana, Guadeloupe, Martinique, Mayotte, and Réunion) are particularly notable examples of this. However, as you mention, without a clear definition as to what is considered "dependent" or not it can't really be argued that these entries are not to be included. I remind you that "integrated" and "dependent" are not directly equivalent and interchangeable terms. Therefore, maybe our assumption is wrong, and the RS's understand the situation better than we do. We cannot assume we know better than our RS's, that is OR, and is part of the point The Four Deuces made directly above your commment. - Wiz9999 (talk) 11:12, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

I reckon we should just stick with the UN's M49 list and their list of Non-Self-Governing Territories. The CIA's lists and the EU list can only represent one country or one region's point of view, they shouldn't be used as a globally-accepted RS. 144.130.162.86 (talk) 06:33, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Where are the legal sources?

Okay, according to this article, only four countries (New Zealand, Norway, the United Kingdom, and the United States) in the world have dependent territories (political entities similar to independent countries but are still somewhat associated with their parent states) while all other territories mentioned in the article are political entities similar to dependent territories but are still considered integral parts of their parent states. I wonder where are the sources which legally distinguish these two groups? What about Jan Mayen, Palmyra Atoll, the three islands of the Caribbean Netherlands, and the five French Overseas Regions? Why are they not included in the second group even though most sources cited do list them as dependent territories? And why is the Åland Islands listed even though most sources cited do not include this region in their lists? This article is so confusing. 2001:8003:9008:1301:E878:24EC:B15E:BEA8 (talk) 13:32, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

It would be helpful if someone added sources. The U.S. Supreme Court decided in the Insular cases that the newly acquired territory of Hawaii was part of the U.S. When most of the territory became the new state of Hawaii, Palmyra did not. Since it is uninhabited, it is administered in the same way as other uninhabited territories that are not part of the U.S. That may be why such sources, such s travel guides, group it with them. TFD (talk) 00:30, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Australian external territories

I think the Australian external territories should be removed from the list. There is nothing special about these territories, they are integral parts of Australia. Christmas Island and the Cocos (Keeling) Islands use West Australia postcodes, Heard Island and McDonald Islands uses Tasmania postcode, and Norfolk Island uses New South Wales postcode. I think the Australian government created these territories in order to claim a bigger territorial sea and EEZ, they are de facto suburbs of Australia.

Sources:

Christmas Island: https://auspost.com.au/postcode/christmas-island

Cocos (Keeling) Islands: https://auspost.com.au/postcode/cocos-(keeling)-islands

Heard Island: https://auspost.com.au/postcode/heard-island

McDonald Islands: https://auspost.com.au/postcode/mcdonald-islands

Norfolk Island: https://auspost.com.au/postcode/norfolk-island

2001:8003:9008:1301:E05A:E872:BA0:EF47 (talk) 08:23, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

This came up in archives 1 and 2. The fact that Australia provides services to these islands does not incorporate them into Australia. Furthermore, the Australian government uses Christmas Island as a detention center for refugees arrested at sea so that they never enter Australia and therefore do not have the same legal protections. Specifically, because they are not in Australia, they cannot apply for asylum in Australia. TFD (talk) 11:03, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Link: https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/is-australia-a-country-or-a-continent.html

According to this website, the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory have been given limited self-governing powers by the federal government. Australia's eight other territories (one internal and seven external) are all under the direct control of the federal government. Since these territories are under the direct control of the national government, they are not dependencies or dependent territories. In fact, even the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory are more dependency-like areas than them. These Australian external territories are just normal unincorporated areas. 2001:8003:9008:1301:3CC2:B028:D24C:6C22 (talk) 14:11, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Comment According to the article, the Australian external territories are included as they are often found in lists of dependent territories, despite having no autonomy. However, the French and Dutch overseas territories are also often found in lists of dependent territories, why aren't they treated the same? The ISO has assigned these territories with their own country codes and UN M49 has included all of them as dependent territories. I reckon we should either include all of them or exclude all of them, not partially include some of them under a vague concept. 2001:8003:9008:1301:4DD7:29E8:4A5D:3BC7 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 16:25, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

External territories are by definition administered by but not part of another country. TFD (talk) 16:51, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Link: https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/territories-regions-cities/territories

According the Australian Government, all external territories are under the direct administration of the federal government. There is no difference between them and the Jervis Bay Territory, a mainland/internal territory.

Furthermore, it seems to me that Christmas Island and the Cocos (Keeling) Islands are subdivisions of the Indian Ocean Territories of Christmas Island and Cocos (Keeling) Islands instead of separate territories. 2001:8003:9008:1301:4DD7:29E8:4A5D:3BC7 (talk) 17:53, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

The difference is that internal territories are part of Australia, while external territories are not. Typically the constitution and all national or federal legislation extend in full to internal territories, while they only extend to external territories if they are specifically mentioned. The degree of self-governance of a territory is wholly irrelevant to whether or not it is part of the parent state. TFD (talk) 06:58, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Denmark vs. UK

Why are two constituent countries of the Kingdom of Denmark – Greenland and the Faroe Islands (but not Denmark) – included, while none of the four constituent countries of the United Kingdom are included? This seems like an arbitrary distinction. Probably Greenland and the Faroes should be removed. Dylanvt (talk) 23:11, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Because the term "constituent country" is arbitrary and meaningless in an administrative sense, and the administrative structures of the two countries are entirely different. CMD (talk) 01:24, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Because they are not the same. Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, secure particularly England, are not self-governing republics or autonomous States or arm's length from the UK. They have varying degrees of home rule, but nothing like Faroe Islands' relationship with Denmark. It's stark with England, with no devolution at all, no regional assembly, no English parliament, nothing. From a strict constitutional stand point, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are only considered "separate" by convention, they're not really guaranteed that relationship at all. doktorb _words^deeds 03:16, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Does that not make England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland so-called "dependent territories" of the UK? Both Denmark and the UK are included in this List of unitary states with devolution. Should they both be included there, but not here? Dylanvt (talk) 16:41, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

No because per the article they are not "outside the controlling state's integral area." That is, they are all part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. In fact, together they make up 100% of the country. TFD (talk)

What about Denmark? Are there any legal sources stating that Faroe Islands and Greenland aren't integral parts of Denmark? 2001:8003:9008:1301:E45D:E6E5:BE1A:96D5 (talk) 05:37, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Netherlands

To me it seems like Aruba, Curaçao, and Sint Maarten should be removed from this list. Aren't the four constituent countries of the Kingdom of the Netherlands equal? The Netherlands is a lot larger than the other three countries, but other than that, is there any reason they should be listed here? Also, if they should be included, the list at the bottom of this page shows the "sovereign state" for the three countries as the Netherlands, which is a subdivision, not a sovereign state. I think it should be changed to the Kingdom of the Netherlands, which is a sovereign state.--angryfishstick1 (talk) (contribs) 21:20, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

That's a reasonable argument, but in practice is not accepted by the Dutch government or other countries. Coincidentally, I looked up a school in Sint Maarten and couldn't find it in the World Directory of medical schools. It turns out you have to click on a box to get states that were not members of the UN. TFD (talk) 01:53, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Comment If Aruba, Curaçao, the Netherlands, and Sint Maarten of the Kingdom of the Netherlands are in the same political structure as England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales of the United Kingdom, then I reckon we should remove them from the list. We need legal experts to comment on this. 2001:8003:9008:1301:E45D:E6E5:BE1A:96D5 (talk) 05:49, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

They're not remotely the same. CMD (talk) 05:55, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Dependent territory

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Dependent territory's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "jqgc":

• From United Wa State Army: 2011-10-13, 缅甸佤邦竟然是一个山寨版的中国 Archived 26 November 2016 at the Wayback Machine, 军情观察
• From Wa State: 13 October 2011, 缅甸佤邦竟然是一个山寨版的中国 Archived 26 November 2016 at the Wayback Machine, 军情观察

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 23:33, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Northern Ireland

NI has been added and removed a few times now, so I wanted to add a section here for discussion. These are the relevant edit summaries:

• added 29 Jun 2022 by BlackBony: the same as Åland
• removed 5 Sep 2022 by 115.178.249.89: does not meet the criteria
• added 6 Sep 2022 by 2001:ee0:222:53bf:2839:c602:9af2:ddb: "Similar entities" don't have to meet all the criteria for a dependent territory
• removed 6 Sep 2022 by Chipmunkdavis: Rv, need a source putting them in this sort of list
• added 6 Sep 2022 by Privybst:
• removed 6 Sep 2022 by 2001:ee0:4101:771d:85e7:607f:6183:faf2: See other edits
• added 6 Sep 2022 by Riverbend21: Unexplained content removal (RW 16.1)

--Lasunncty (talk) 01:38, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

This discussion points to the basic weakness of the article. In most cases, international law makes no distinction between what is part of a country and what is a dependent territory. While domestic law does, there is no consistency between the legal systems of different countries.

It's similar to having an article about "good Roman emperors." Certainly Augustus would make the list, while Caligula would not. But Wikipedia editors would never degree on the entire list. That't why Wikipedia has policies against original research and synthesis, which this article clearly violates.

TFD (talk) 01:51, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

At least it's better than our article on Country. CMD (talk) 07:45, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

I should have said the lists sections. How do you list things where there is no agreement in reliable sources about what belongs? TFD (talk) 03:03, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Dependent territories has a specific legal meaning, many of what is described as dependent territories in this article are not. Specifically the list of countries under the UN List of Non-Self-Governing Territories (16) are the only remaining dependent territories. Northern Ireland, Aland islands et al simply shouldn't be in this article. There are some POV sources that will describe some territories as dependent but effectively we're giving undue credence to what is essentially fringe views.

Unfortunately the UN being what it is, the list is incomplete, since it depended on the governing power declaring their dependent territories on admission to the UN. So Tibet et al are not listed, so the list itself is incomplete. Nevertheless the UN List remains the only internationally recognised authorative source. I would propose stripping out anything that doesn't relate to that list. WCM_email 07:27, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

There is also a CIA list which does not coincide with UN List of Non-Self-Governing Territories. Privybst (talk) 07:41, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

So we have different possible lists, depending on what criteria the writers choose to use. The UN list incidentally does not include uninhabited territories. TFD (talk) 08:59, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

So, which source or sources include Northern Ireland? I have not seen Northern Island listed by any source. 2001:8003:9007:8201:91DD:90CA:42B6:96B7 (talk) 11:40, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Rotuma and Rodrigues

Should this list also include Rotuma as a dependency of Fiji and Rodrigues as an autonomous area of Mauritius? little muddy funkster (talk) 11:04, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Those are a different sort of polity, even though the same words are used. CMD (talk) 12:45, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Could you please elaborate your point in more detail? 2001:8003:913E:5D01:F131:5FC3:17B5:18E6 (talk) 12:45, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

Abyei and Pakistani administered Kashmir

The two polities that make up Pakistani administered Kashmir, Azad Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan, are dependent territories of Pakistan that are (are Pakistan's constitution) not integral parts of Pakistan. They thus meet the definition of a "dependent territory" defined in this article and should be included. They are treated as akin to dependent territories on the main list of sovereign states page. Likewise Abyei is a condominium created by an international treaty governed by a joint administrative body appointed by Sudan and South Sudan. It is thus a polity that was created by international agreement with sovereignty limitations and meets the criteria for inclusion. XavierGreen (talk) 19:04, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Comment I wouldn't support the inclusion of condominiums, otherwise, we should include Antarctica in our list too. You have raised an interesting point about Pakistan. I don't know much about Pakistani politics, we need comments from an expert in order to reach a consensus here. 2001:8003:913E:5D01:F131:5FC3:17B5:18E6 (talk) 13:04, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi, not exactly an expert on the subject but a lot of what OP is saying seems to correct according to what I've been reading. It would appear that Pakistan has not incorporated Kashmir into itself and, at the very least nominally considers it its own thing, even though its hardly the case, being that Kashmir depends on Pakistan in economic and administrative regards. Hell, even the president of Pakistan literally said

”Azad Kashmir has its separate identity with a President and Prime Minister. It is not a province of Pakistan.”, and then his spokeperson replied with ”Pakistan does not claim Kashmir as an integral part. Kashmir is disputed. We however, hope that when Kashmiris are able to exercise their right to make a choice, they would opt for Pakistan”

Its such a rare case, all my life ive seen heads of state filling their mouths with cheap speeches of patriotism and how their ownership of x land is righteous, while these fellas are almost like ”eh, itd be cool if they stayed but whatevs” 201.235.236.10 (talk) 05:05, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Edit warring

Hello all. Please remember or take a look at the following policies (specially if you are an experienced editor!):

• WP:EDITWAR
• WP:CONSENSUS
• WP:DISPUTE

"If an edit is too complex to explain in an edit summary, or the change is contentious, add a section to the talk page that explains your rationale." Cheers! Thinker78 (talk) 20:58, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Åland

Many other administrative subdivision inhabit a special position guaranteed by an international treaty. Dependent territories has a specific legal meaning, the list of countries under the UN List of Non-Self-Governing Territories (16) are the only remaining inhabited dependent territories. I propose stripping out anything that doesn't relate to that list. I propose to remove Åland from this page. Onlk (talk) 14:21, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

The article for the UN list is United Nations list of non-self-governing territories, which has a list of its 17 entries. It would be good to get a source on this specific legal meaning. CMD (talk) 01:37, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Åland is not in UN M49 List, not in US Bureau of Intelligence and Research list of Dependencies and Areas of Special Sovereignty, not in CIA lists: [1] and [2]. Entities with only limited unique autonomy, such as the autonomous regions of Portugal, the Canary Islands and the autonomous cities of Spain, Barbuda of Antigua and Barbuda, Nevis of Saint Kitts and Nevis, Zanzibar of Tanzania, and Sabah and Sarawak of Malaysia are also not included. Why do include Åland then? --Onlk (talk) 11:04, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

That green text has nothing to do with Åland, as it is not there for that reason. It is there due to a very old merger with territories under international treaties. I am unsure how this relates to your original post, which was about changing the list to echo the UN Non-Self-Governing Territories list. CMD (talk) 12:14, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

My original proposal is to remove Åland from this page. --Onlk (talk) 12:15, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Your proposal, as written, was "stripping out anything that doesn't relate to that [UN] list". If you want to make a discussion specifically about Åland, I suggest crafting a new post which specifically discusses Åland. CMD (talk) 12:43, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

I would agree with the proposal to remove Aland, since it isn't by any applicable definition a dependent territory. I have commented previously that this article is a bit of a mess and continues WP:OR and WP:SYN over the definition of a dependent territory. The wooliness of the definition of a dependent territory has perhaps allowed this to persist but its long overdue for a clean up. WCM_email 13:06, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

According to the lead, "A dependent territory, dependent area, or dependency (sometimes referred as an external territory) is a territory that does not possess full political independence or sovereignty as a sovereign state, yet remains politically outside the controlling state's integral area."

According to its page, "Åland is governed according to the Act on the Autonomy of Åland and international treaties. These laws guarantee the region's autonomy from Finland, which has ultimate sovereignty over them".

There seems to be a case for it being a dependent territory. Thinker78 (talk) 20:43, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Aland is an integral part of Finland and under Finnish sovereignty. No sources describe it as a dependent territory, its inclusion here is partially based upon individual editors interpretation based on the definition of a dependent territory, which is WP:OR and WP:SYN. As such that isn't ground for inclusion, we should be guided by what sources actually say not by our own interpretation. And that in a nutshell is what is wrong with the article. WCM_email 09:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

"[...] we should be guided by what sources actually say not by our own interpretation". Good point. Thinker78 (talk) 01:04, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

I guess if it doesn't have backing by a reference it can be removed per WP:VERIFY. Thinker78 (talk) 02:39, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Not sure this sock conversation is a good place to discuss this, but it is quite easy to find sources describing or treating Aland as a dependent territory (eg. [3][4]). Aland is at any rate not included in the main list of dependent territories on this page, despite the impression it is in the conversation above. CMD (talk) 03:17, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

It has its own section under Finland. The previous discussion I was involved in had not cites but rather it was editor's interpretation of what a dependent territory was. Now that someone has provided a cite, I'll withdraw my comment. WCM_email 08:08, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

• CU note Onlk is the sock of a globally banned user. I would remove all their comments here, but they have already been replied to. They should be given zero weight when determining consensus; I'll leave y'all to figure out what you want to do now. Girth Summit _(blether) 13:07, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

HUGE SUPPORT I support the removal of Åland from the list of dependent territories. In the article Regions of Finland, Åland is listed as one of the 19 first-level administrative divisions of Finland (although one with a special status). In my opinion, if a region is listed as one of the first-level administrative divisions of a country, along with other "normal" ones, then it is a special region, not a dependent territory. A dependent territory should be politically outside its administering state's "country proper", not a part of the "country proper".

For the same reason, I propose the removal of Svalbard from the list of dependent territories too. Svalbard is an unincorporated area of Norway, not a dependency of Norway. 112.120.10.133 (talk) 11:28, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Svalbard and Clipperton Island

I propose the removal of Svalbard and Clipperton Island from the list of dependent territories. Both entities are unincorporated areas of their respective administering state, not dependent territories. A dependent territory should be politically outside its administering state's "country proper", not a part of the "country proper". I also support the removal of Åland in the discussion above. 112.120.10.133 (talk) 12:32, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

All of the territories you mention are already in the "similar entities" section, not the "dependent territories" section. --Lasunncty (talk) 10:16, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

They aren't "similar entities" either. Unincorporated internal areas shouldn't be included in this article at all. 2001:8003:9100:2C01:895F:24B6:B6CE:477E (talk) 03:19, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

They are similar enough. You are being too pedantic. To pretend there is no difference between, say, an island off the coast of mainland France and Clipperton, is unrealistic. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 03:34, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Well, what exactly is the difference between, say, Corsica and Clipperton Island? To me, the only notable difference is that Corsica has a permanent population while Clipperton Island is uninhabited. According to the article overseas France, Clipperton Island is an overseas "state private property" under the direct authority of the French government. In other words, the island is a part of "France proper". It is not a French dependent territory. 2001:8003:9100:2C01:895F:24B6:B6CE:477E (talk) 04:19, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Irrespective of the particular status of Clipperton Island, that is not what private property means. CMD (talk) 06:27, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

The IP is confusing two different defintions of unicorporated: (1) not formed into a legal corporation (such as a municiplity) and (2) not included as part of a whole.

While the article they link to uses the first definition, this article uses the second. Under the second definition, an unincorporated territory is "politically outside its administering state's "country proper", not a part of the "country proper"". IOW it has not been incorporated into the country proper. It may or may not have a local government.

TFD (talk) 18:06, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

The West Bank and Gaza?

Should this article list the West Bank and Gaza as Dependent Territories? Per the Gaza article: "The territories of Gaza and the West Bank are separated from each other by Israeli territory. Both fell under the jurisdiction of the Palestinian Authority, but the Strip is governed by Hamas, a militant, fundamentalist Islamic organization, which came to power in the last-held elections in 2006." Rxtreme (talk) 19:40, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

A dependent territory must be legally external to the metropolitan state, which in turn must exercise control over it. How does this apply? TFD (talk) 19:51, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

The West Bank is directly controlled by the State of Palestine, the Gaza Strip is controlled by a rebel militant group (Hamas). Both territories are integral parts of the State of Palestine, they are not dependent territories. 2001:8003:9100:2C01:ACFE:7B23:904F:A674 (talk) 04:39, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

UN list of dependent territories

User:Chipmunkdavis, User:Roger 8 Roger, User:Xevres, User:Wee Curry Monster My addition of the United Nations list of non-self-governing territories was reverted and object of a dispute. We should discuss whether to add it or remove it or something else.

Although there is a stand-alone page for it, the practice is prevalent to mirror some content of subtopics in the relevant pages. Therefore, I don't think my succinct table is redundant. In fact, I think omitting said information from this page is less than ideal, because it is essential information to the subject of the page. There may be text indicating that a dependent territory is on the UN list but it would be more practical and better format to have a separate table of said list as well. Thinker78 (talk) 21:42, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Mirroring the table is redundant. We don't eg. have the US State Department list of dependent territories. CMD (talk) 00:52, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm puzzled by the section added above, aimed as it is toward a bunch of seasoned editors, it seems to me to violate WP:DTTR and aimed to browbeat your fellow editors. I'm sure that I may have misconstrued your motives but felt it important to bring to your attention, ie even if that were not your intention it rather frames your approach to comments. To add to the discussion, I am mildly in favour of the addition of that table but I also recognise the strong arguments against it; namely that is to some extent redundant and incomplete. As such I'm not inclined to press for inclusion, rather suggesting that a more rounded and complete approach is required. As currently formulated I'm not in favour of inclusion but I would be prepared to consider a constructive proposal that addresses the concerns presented. WCM_email 17:16, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Argumentum ad verecundiam. I have been in Wikipedia long enough to know that senior editors are not perfect (btw, I did not use a template). But tbh before posting the policies I was going to report the page to the edit warring noticeboard to be analyzed by editors more experienced about the issue. I decided against and instead just post the aforementioned thread that generated irk. Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 04:40, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

@Chipmunkdavis maybe we should, as the US is a world power. I would understand if we don't have 10 lists of 10 different countries or organizations in this page. But it may be a good idea to include a select few of the most notable ones and make mention of others. After all, how was the current list compiled? Does it pick and choose items to include, does it have consistency? Thinker78 (talk) 20:49, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

It was compiled by consensus, and does have consistency. There are always questions around the system (as there are with all similar topics), however these are more noticeable here as a reflection of the topic itself, which has always somewhat of a term of convenience. CMD (talk) 01:16, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Comment I think we should list the UN list of dependent territories at the top, since this is the official list of dependent territories recognized by the United Nations Special Committee on Decolonization. Then we can add other remaining inhabited dependent territories by country. 2001:8003:9100:2C01:ACFE:7B23:904F:A674 (talk) 04:53, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea. Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 05:52, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Uninhabited territories should be removed though. They aren't country-like dependencies, they don't even have a local government and they have no people to be governed either. 2001:8003:9100:2C01:ACFE:7B23:904F:A674 (talk) 07:18, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

"Dependencies and other territories" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Dependencies and other territories has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 31 § Dependencies and other territories until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 21:07, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Possible vandalism

Please roll back the latest edits in the article to approximately the state of January 7, 2024. User Koavf changed the header of the tables of the dependent territories of New Zealand, Norway and the United Kingdom. Firstly, the matter has not been completed, and secondly, it has only gotten worse, since it is now unclear which territories are uninhabited and which are claimed.

Also, Palmyra Atoll was added to the table of dependent territories of the United States, although the table states before the table that this territory is excluded from the list because “it is classified as an incorporated territory under US law”. The result is a contradiction between the text, table and image at the very beginning of the article.

I apologize in advance for possible mistakes—I live in Russia and do not fully speak English.

Откатите, пожалуйста, последние правки в статье примерно до состояния на 7 января 2024 года. Пользователь Koavf изменил шапку таблиц зависимых территорий Новой Зеландии, Норвегии и Соединённого Королевства. Во-первых, дело не доведено до конца, а во-вторых, стало только хуже, поскольку теперь непонятно, какие территории необитаемы, а какие — заявлены.

Также в таблицу зависимых территорий Соединённых Штатов был добавлен атолл Пальмира, хотя перед таблицей сказано, что данная территория исключена из списка, так как «в законодательстве США она классифицируется как инкорпорированная территория». В итоге получается противоречие между текстом, таблицей и изображением в самом начале статьи.

Заранее извиняюсь за возможные ошибки — я живу в России и не в полной мере владею английским языком. Alexander Berezin 17.12.2002 (talk) 13:09, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

• Support The old version is indeed a better one. The edits made by Koavf violate both WP:NPOV and WP:POINT. These edits should be reverted. 2001:8003:9100:2C01:D8C5:91F5:82F8:EFF4 (talk) 15:52, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

  What? How are they NPOV or POINT-y? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:21, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

  Your tables are ugly, man. The main purpose of this article is creating a list of dependent territories, so these territories should be the first (main) item in the table, not their political status. The original tables are easier for the readers to acquire information, not the weird ones created by you. 2001:8003:9100:2C01:B150:204C:65CD:3FA0 (talk) 01:34, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

  That in no way answers my questions at all. Have you read MOS:DTAB? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:50, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

These are required by MOS:TABLECAPTION. Do not remove them, just improve them. See also MOS:COLHEAD. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:21, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Koavf, your edits seem to have created new "Status" titles for NZ and Norway. Where were they from and why were the old ones changed? As for Palmyra that was not in Koavf's edits, and either way I have reverted. CMD (talk) 04:34, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

"Where were they from" ??? and "why were the old ones changed?" MOS:TABLECAPTION. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:39, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Could you explain how MOS:TABLECAPTION requires the changing of "Dependent territory" to "Territory" in some cases and "Dependency" in other cases? CMD (talk) 04:44, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

It does not. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:18, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Okay, so is there another reason for why you changed the status titles if not MOS:TABLECAPTION as you indicated in your previous answer? CMD (talk) 05:28, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

What are "status titles"? I still have no clue what you're talking about. There were no captions, there need to be captions, therefore, I added captions. I don't see what the problem is. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:01, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

I provided specific examples two messages above. Given there was apparently no reason, I have restored the long-standing version. I do agree with OP that it is unusual for the tables to be inconsistent, so would suggest a future change be made to all tables instead of just 3. CMD (talk) 14:44, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

So to be clear, you know that table captions are required per MOS:DTAB and they are used by the blind, but you removed them and you also know that MOS:COLHEAD says to not insert columns that span the table in the middle like this because they are difficult for blind users to navigate and you inserted them anyway? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:43, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

What I did was ask very openly why the content was changed. I got one answer, then a note that this was not actually the answer, then a dismissal. Those who are blind benefit as do all our readers from accurate and explainable content choices. CMD (talk) 02:55, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

I in no way dismissed you: I asked you what you meant. You on the other hand dismissed me just now. The solution to what you perceive to be deficient table captions is not remove them, but improve them. Have you read MOS:DTAB? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:53, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

I have openly asked you from the beginning to explain the edits, which were clearly not just adding captions. I have provided specific quotes. I'm in some cases getting 3 word replies to my questions. And yes I have read the MOS. CMD (talk) 09:04, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

I have answered all your questions, but I don't know what a "status title" is, hence I asked. I explained that I did two things: I added table captions and removed column headers and gave you citations as to why: MOS:TABLECAPTION and MOS:COLHEAD. Since you have evidently read the entire MOS, I am still waiting on an answer to my yes–no question above. You know that captions are obligatory and you removed them. You know that column headers are disallowed and you added them (back). Why? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:10, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Prior to your question I had already quoted the changes, which were not one of those two things you list now. I ma not sure why this is still being missed, despite my repeated mention of them. I already answered your second question too, here, also apparently missed. CMD (talk) 09:37, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

This is neither a yes nor a no: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dependent_territory&diff=prev&oldid=1217989001. Please do not play games while others are trying to be serious. You can easily answer "Yes, I did that, knowing better because I have read the MOS", but you are just being unserious. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:53, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

"Why?" is not a yes or no question. At any rate, I have as mentioned answered the questions, with an actual answer rather than the made up quote there. There is a very simple path forward, which is explaining the content changes I noted, explaining the content changes Alexander Berezin noted, and explaining the inconsistency within the page Alexander Berezin noted. I can't see how you can claim to be serious when none of these have been done over the past few days. CMD (talk) 10:05, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

"So to be clear, you know that table captions are required per MOS:DTAB and they are used by the blind, but you removed them and you also know that MOS:COLHEAD says to not insert columns that span the table in the middle like this because they are difficult for blind users to navigate and you inserted them anyway?" does not include the word "why". I did not ask you "why", I asked you: "to be clear, you did x, yes or no" and you keep on not answering and then come up with demonstrably untrue nonsense about how I asked "Why..." which never happened. I'll add table captions and remove column headers to all the tables since you seem unwilling or unable to help blind users as the MOS explicitly says is necessary and per your directive to do so above. You could have also done this, but were motivated to write this noise instead. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:10, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

You literally asked me "Why?" here. It is two of your messages above. Clearly the previous answers are still being missed, so I do not see this as productive. I have already noted a possible way forward above. CMD (talk) 10:15, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes and prior to that, I asked another question that you did not answer, which is clearly the one that I am waiting on you to answer and which you won't because you're playing games. Go ahead and answer it. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:17, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Your question prior to that was "Have you read MOS:DTAB?" to which I literally replied "yes". Further direct personal attacks assuming bad faith will be reported. CMD (talk) 10:25, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

lol, I didn't make any personal attacks. Anyway, you've made it clear what your intentions are. You have a nice life and be good and be well. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:32, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

 This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:33, 9 April 2024 (UTC)