File talk:Supranational European Bodies.png

Monaco and the Eurozone

I thought Monaco was part of the Eurozone? The legal tender is Euros. Check out the Monaco page for more information.

Unfortunately this would mess up the entire diagram since it is an exceptional case: inside the Eurozone but not inside the EU...

Thoughts?

--188.223.230.160 (talk) 20:13, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

My thoughts are covered in the Eurozone section further down - I've outlined it again below:

But the de facto members unilaterally adopted the currency. They aren't actual members of the eurozone.

Monaco is only a de jure member after it unilaterally adopted the currency. Monaco can issue coins, which are legal tender in the EU countries using the euro, but they themselves are not offical members of it, they don't have any representation at the European Central Bank. Wdcf (talk) 12:40, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Excellent

This is a very good diagram my complements to whoever desinged it.--J intela (talk) 05:03, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree! So much information at a glance that is otherwise fiendishly complicated. It makes you wonder how the real political system operates without locking solid! The world's goal should be to first get everyone into the circles, and then everyone into the same circle, and then finally get rid of the circles: utopia! Mu2 (talk) 20:42, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Multi-speed Europe! Wdcf (talk) 10:48, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

This is a very good diagram; but, if author can, please not forget to put to the picture OSCE members: in the page "organizations in Europe" and in this picture must be and Organization for security and co-operation in Europe (members of the Organization for security and co-operation in Europe)! Best regards, --Sergejus (talk) 22:23, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Do you know that 15 percent of Kazachstan's territory is in geographical Europe? Please inform me about European percentage of Turkey' territory...--Sergejus (talk) 22:24, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid the OSCE is excluded from this diagram for reasons explained in the OSCE section of this Talk page. Wdcf (talk) 13:00, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Microstates

I agree very much that is is a good diagram, the addition of the Customs Union gives even more body to it. Should some more states be showed in the Schengen area, for instance Monaco, San Marino and Vatican City?--wgeelhoed 14:52, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

They aren't formal members. Liechtenstien will soon and the Vatican is considering it. Therequiembellishere (talk) 05:39, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

CEFTA

Would it also be a nice idea, since EFTA is shown on this page, to display its Central European counterpart CEFTA also? --wgeelhoed 14:52, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

I have looked up the CEFTA; none of the members are members of any of the other groups/bodies on this Venn diagram, therefore they would just be in a circle in the corner on their own - there would be no overlap with the other elements of the diagram. Therefore since there is no relationships to show between the members of the CEFTA and the other countries I think it's best left off. Wdcf (talk) 17:04, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

However, since the Council of Europe has been added (which I think a very good addition) all CEFTA members are in the diagram, except Kosovo (or better: UNMIK). wgeelhoed 09:02, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I also support CEFTA's inclusion. Therequiembellishere (talk) 05:41, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

CEFTA could now be added relatively easily - except I am unsure what flag to use for Kosovo that will avoid excessive flamming on here?! When people agree what flag to put for Kosovo I'll update the png. Until then, I'll tidy up the Monaco-flag move. Wdcf (talk) 17:44, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

De jure, "United Nations Interim Administration Mission on behalf of Kosovo" is a member of CEFTA, and that body uses the UN flag as far as I know. However, UN is not a member itself, so using the UN flag would probably only lead to confusion. An option could be to write "UNMIK", "Kosovo" or "UNMIK/Kosovo" out in letters instead. I'm not sure if that would avoid excessive flaming, though: if Kosovo is a country, the flag of the country should be used here, and if it isn't a country, then it shouldn't be listed here at all, since the image only list countries. And the controversy seems to deal with whether Kosovo is a country or not... (212.247.11.156 (talk) 18:11, 22 August 2009 (UTC))

The Republic of Kosovo and UNMIK administer the same area. The Republic should still be part of CEFTA. I'm personally in favour of using the actual flag. Therequiembellishere (talk) 18:29, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

I have just checked the Nuvola flag icon set, and we have a problem of another kind: Nuvola have no Kosovo flag! So it can't go on the diagram until such a flag exists anyway!Wdcf (talk) 00:39, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

How about another circle with the unofficial users of the €, Kosovo, Montenegro and Andorra. So we have a connection between the CEFTA circle and the other ones (indirect but existing) 18:33 10.01.2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.223.187.29 (talk)

No, this diagram is only for official members of organisations who have joined by signing an agreement, law or treaty. Wdcf (talk) 14:53, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Ok, it was just an idea, but the Cefta is still missing in the graphic. And to get the eyes on that was the real reason for my intervention. By the way, Kosovo(UNMIK) is also missing. I would change it myself if I could. 18:12, 11 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.223.187.29 (talk)

Please read the discussion above to discover why both CEFTA and UNMIK are not currently on the diagram. Wdcf (talk) 23:55, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

I had, you too? There's no reason written, why there is no Cefta circle in the graphic. And for the Kosovo topic - there exist a flag of Kosovo(UNMIK) which can be used. 00:08, 13 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.223.187.29 (talk)

There is no CEFTA circle in the Venn because this would necessitate the inclusion of Kosovo, and initially I was unsure which flag to use (see comment wdcf 20 Aug 2009). Assuming the consensus was to use the actual Kosovo flag, as my next comment above says the Nuvola icon set does not contain a Kosovo flag. Without a Kosovo flag in the Nuvola icon set I cannot add that flag to the diagram (see wdcf 23 Aug 2009). Wdcf (talk) 13:55, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

There is a Kosovo flag available in the Nuvola set since september 2009, however. It appears in the sections 'disputed territories' of the Nuvola Flag Project. So maybe now these additions could be made... Wgeelhoed 12:43, 17 November 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wgeelhoed (talk • contribs)

Can you post a link to this flag, I can't find it. Wdcf (talk) 13:18, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Here is the link: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nuvola_Kosovan_flag.svg. Wgeelhoed 08:25, 9 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wgeelhoed (talk • contribs)

Now that we have a Kosovar flag, is CEFTA able to finally be added in? Therequiembellishere (talk) 23:39, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

De facto members

I agree, very nice diagram. Good that CU has been added after proposing it in the svg version. I would be great that this layout be available in some kind of editable form, such as the aforementioned svg, so that anyone can contribute to it in the collaborative way typical of wikipedia open issues.... For instance, instersection between CU states like Andorra or San Marino, and de-facto euro users (these states, plus Vatican City, Monaco...) and between these and Schengen "open border" (most of the previously mentioned states), etc.... Danrowe —Preceding undated comment added 15:07, 30 July 2009 (UTC).

I'm not sure how to make svg's at the moment - but I am taking on board suggestions for further expansions of this Venn diagram - but I don't want it to get too unweildly - hence for the moment I am sticking to actual member of named organisations, and didn't want to clutter it with "de-facto" 'members'. Wdcf (talk) 10:18, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

OSCE

A further expansion could also be the addition of the OSCE. Most of the countries are already in the diagram. A drawback of that would be that it introduces non-European countries such as the US and Canada. wgeelhoed 09:02, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I disagree based on the Canada/United States drawback. If the diagrams go beyond Europe, then <sarcasm>why not put the United Nations in?</sarcasm> Therequiembellishere (talk) 05:43, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Want to keep this in Europe really. Wdcf (talk) 17:44, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Besides, if too many bodies are included, the image will look too messy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.247.11.156 (talk) 15:05, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I am agree with Mr wgeelhoed, all members of the Organization for security and co-operation in Europe must be represented. Best regards, --Sergejus (talk) 22:09, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

I think that it would be good to have two diagrams - the current one and a second for "Europe-centric" organizations that would include additionaly OSCE, NATO and ESA. Alinor (talk) 20:15, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

I may consider producing a diagram that contains organisations of which the entire 27 members of the EU are wholly included or wholly excluded, which would allow me to represent them with the single EU flag, thus preventing the diagram from becoming too unwieldy. But this would defiantly be separate to the current diagram, which is to only contain organisations, all of whose members are in geographic Europe Wdcf (talk) 21:14, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

A small amount of research has made me realise that is never going to work, some of the EU is not in NATO and some is not in the ESA etc. I'll have a little think about how to implement this. I think the goal should be to include those organisations that are not already in the current Venn because they stray outside of Europe, such as the USA and Canada. Currently I've got only got the 3 NATO, ESA and OSCE. Wdcf (talk) 21:39, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Also OECD. Such a chart of primarily but not exclusively European organizations would be interesting for me too, and I'll eventually try to make one, if you've given up on the idea of doing it yourself. It isn't my top priority, though, so it'll take me a while. Aris Katsaris (talk) 14:05, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

File with OSCE:

TeraCard (talk) 09:12, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Common Travel Area

This is a wonderful diagram, I would just consider there to be one relevant grouping missing. The UK/Irish 'mini-schengen' known as the Common Travel Area (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_travel_area). It may not be of vital importance to the overall picture in europe but it would show that the UK & Ireland are more tightly integrated with each other than with the rest of europe on some matters. Malderon (talk) 16:58, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

The CTA isn't exactly a "Supranational European [Body]" though. Therequiembellishere (talk) 05:44, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Eurozone

Monaco, San Marino and the Vatican are all formal members of the Eurozone. Without them, the diagram is accurate, but not to its fullest extent? Is there a way to slide them in there for the sake of completeness? Therequiembellishere (talk) 05:46, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Besides, it would be useful to list de facto members somehow. Various EU countries + VA, SM and MC are de jure members. All de jure members + Kosovo, ME and AD are also de facto members. Would it be possible to list one "de facto eurozone" and one "de jure eurozone", which mostly overlap? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.247.11.156 (talk) 18:00, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

But the de facto members unilaterally adopted the currency. They aren't actual members of the eurozone. Therequiembellishere (talk) 18:24, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

It also is the only way the Vatican will be included. Therequiembellishere (talk) 19:52, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, at least VA, SM and MC seem to be de jure members: they can issue their own coins, which are legal tender in the EU countries using the euro. On the other hand, they don't send any representation to the ECB, and I'm not sure if ECB's monetary policy takes those countries into account.

This brings up and interesting question. Does it matter especially how much how they are represented in the organisation or the fact that they are, formally and legally, members of it? Obviously, I'm in favour of including them based on the latter. Therequiembellishere (talk) 15:06, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Flag legend

My compliments to the creator of this nice diagram. It would be great if it contained a small legend so that you could look a flag up to see which country it represents. I would gladly add it, but there's no source file for this diagram. Czestmyr (talk) 13:44, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

I think that (if it's possible) the flags could be links to the countries themselves in lieu of a legend. Therequiembellishere (talk) 18:23, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

This was suggested to me by a friend and I agreed it was a good idea, but I'm not sure how to do it on Wiki, and if someone else did it for me, it might need re-doing every time the png is updated...Wdcf (talk) 00:33, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

And what if someone edited your source file (I presume, it's .svg) and sent it back to you? Unless you want to keep the source secret, of course. Czestmyr (talk) 17:10, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

See the beginning of my comment in "De facto members". Wdcf (talk) 22:58, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I see. So you created the whole thing in bitmap? That's a little bit insane :-) Nevertheless, I'll try to make a clickable map out of the image at least. Czestmyr (talk) 11:15, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh no, it's created in an Office program, then just exported to png format. Wdcf (talk) 17:10, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Other countries

BY, Kosovo (if regarded a country) and KZ (partially located in Europe) are not part of any of the bodies on this image. Their flags are not present anywhere on the image. Could their flags be added somewhere outside all of the circles? Otherwise, people might get the impression that all European countries are part of at least one of the bodies. [VA does not appear on the image either, but it is a de jure member of the eurozone. Kosovo will appear somewhere if CEFTA is added, as proposed elsewhere on the talk page.] (212.247.11.156 (talk) 10:37, 23 August 2009 (UTC))

I suppose this makes sense. Although I think they should be put in a place where they don't end up having to move around constantly as the circles change (either by the above discussions or through time). I'm assuming BY is Belarus and KZ is Kazakhstan? Therequiembellishere (talk) 15:09, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Moldova

could someone please take Moldova out of the Council of Europe circle? it already appears in the EU customs zone circle --OettingerCroat (talk) 21:52, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

No it doesn't - Moldova isn't in the Customs Union (but Andorra is) Wdcf (talk) 00:22, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Image map template

I have created an image map template for this image. Don't forget to update the image map every time you make changes to the original image. Czestmyr (talk) 14:12, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah, this is good work indeed - I've been wondering if this was possible, how do you create these? Wdcf (talk) 17:11, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Either with GIMP and then you manually (or using vim or sed) edit the HTML to the correct format. Or you use an online tool. If you look for it, you'll find a link somewhere on wikipedia. Then you create a template page that contains the image with its image map and every time you want to use the image, you just include the template. Look at the source code of the template if you're interested. Czestmyr (talk) 20:03, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Wdcf (talk) 23:56, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Re-arrangement

The countries are in alphabetical order except for Croatia, Portugal and Netherlands. I have edited the image so that Portugal and Netherlands are in the correct order, however it is a PNG file not an SVG file. Should I upload it anyway, or can you please edit it as an SVG file? McLerristarr (Mclay1) (talk) 12:36, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorted - Portugal and the Netherlands are now in the correct order and Croatia has been moved along the arc at the top of the CoE to sit alphabetically. I've also altered the Template to match too. Wdcf (talk) 23:17, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Monaco

Monaco is not a legal member of the Schengen Area. It's as much a member as the Vatican or Liechtenstein. De facto, yes, but not in reality. Therequiembellishere (talk) 15:43, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

As far as I remember the positioning of Monaco was based upon:

"Monaco has an open border with France. Schengen laws are administered as if it were a part of France, and French authorities carry out checks at Monaco's seaport. There are ceremonial guards at the road entrances to Monaco, but they never stop entrants." Wdcf (talk) 20:13, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

But the same rules are in effect for the Vatican, and possibly Liechtenstein. And the rational for including Monaco as a full Schengen state when it's really only de facto contradicts how San Marino, the Vatican and Monaco are left out of the Eurozone circle specifically because they are not legal and formal members of the area (they have an agreement to use the currency but are not members of it). And should the three then be assumed into the Eurozone circle, what of states without an agreement to use the euro at all but still have it as their official currency, namely Andorra, Montenegro and Kosovo? Placing them in would certainly have to be out but the reasoning would be tremulous. I know this is horrendously nit-picky but I just feel that, for consistency's sake, Monaco should remain outside of the Schengen circle unless and until it actually joins the area. The same goes for Liechtenstein, who should join within the next two years, and the Vatican, who may start negotiations to join at an unknown date. Therequiembellishere (talk) 00:43, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Schengen Area#Status of the European microstates tells that Liechtenstein isn't part of Schengen and that both the border with Austria and the border with Switzerland have border checks, although the border checks on the Swiss border only consist of surveillance cameras. On the other hand, Liechtenstein is due to join the Schengen Area later.

Schengen laws apply to Monaco as stated above. On the other hand, Schengen laws do not apply to the Vatical City State or to San Marino. There are no border checks, but the countries don't have access to the Schengen Information System or other Schengen facilities. Furthermore, I'd assume that regular (French) Schengen visas are issued for visiting Monaco whereas I'd assume that Schengen visas aren't issued for visiting San Marino or the Vatican City State, which I guess could mean problems if one of those countries is your main destination. (130.237.227.56 (talk) 14:09, 19 September 2011 (UTC))

Yes, so basically, Monaco is still incorrectly placed as a Schengen state. Therequiembellishere (talk) 14:41, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

It depends on what you mean by being a "Schengen state". Schengen laws apply to Monaco (handled by French authorities), but they don't apply to the Vatican, Liechtenstein or San Marino. Thus, I'd say that Monaco is a Schengen state but that the other three countries are not.

In the case of Liechtenstein, you could even argue that border checks are in force on the Swiss border. Compare with Swedish customs checks at airports and seaports which may sometimes be conducted by passengers walking past a closed door showing a message asking people who have goods to declare to call some specific phone number. There are checks, but they're not very thoroughly done. (Stefan2 (talk) 18:49, 28 September 2011 (UTC))

But despite Lietchtenstein's apparent status as a de facto Schengen state, it's supposed to become an actual member by the end of the year. There's clearly a difference. We've been looking at Schengen only as the states that don't have border checks. But there's much more to Schengen than that, such as the Schengen Information System. None of the microstates are party to anything considered Schengen but the open borders, and that alone doesn't make them members. Therequiembellishere (talk) 19:00, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Assuming that current expansion plans won't change, Liechtenstein will be in a different position in a few months, requiring a move of the flag from one circle to another circle. However, the country should currently not be in the Schengen circle.

As far as I've understood, France is supposed to carry out all Schengen responsibilities on behalf of Monaco, so I'd assume that the Schengen Information System, common visas and the rest do apply to Monaco (although involving France), but I'm not certain about this. In the case of the Vatican and San Marino, the border is open, but other features (SIS, visas) don't apply.

BTW, I hope you are aware that Finland and the Netherland recently arranged so that Bulgaria and Romania won't join on the previously announced date, so they won't end up in the Schengen circle yet. I think I read somewhere that they were incorrectly included in the circle on a previously announced (but changed) date. (Stefan2 (talk) 07:12, 29 September 2011 (UTC))

Estonia

Is anyone able to add the new member to the Zone? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.180.39.164 (talk) 21:41, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

NATO

This is a fantastic image, but it is missing Europe's most important security organization: NATO! --Kevlar (talk • contribs) 04:39, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Which is an Atlanticist organisation, not a European one... Therequiembellishere (talk) 04:46, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Which of the members is located in the Atlantic? TeraCard (talk) 09:15, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Here is one: File:Supranational European Bodies with NATO members-en.svg TeraCard (talk) 09:15, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Benelux

Should the Benelux not be an even smaller circle inside the Schengen Area?

--Jeroen (talk) 22:49, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't think: Bénélux is a local economic agreament and has been absorbed into the OECE, the CECA and the CEE. Today, I don't think it has some legal application with the common market. Damien Clauzel (talk) 13:16, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I think that the Benelux, similar to the Visegrád Group, still exists as a way to coordinate integration on a smaller scale. Therequiembellishere (talk) 23:37, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Just as the Nordic Council, the Nordic Council of Ministers and a number of other organisations. It would be too messy to include all of them, though. (Stefan2 (talk) 18:54, 28 September 2011 (UTC))

Inspired by this

Inspired by this marvellous diagram here, I went ahead and did a similar one for African organizations at File:AfricanOrgs-Diagram.svg. I wouldn't mind comments/critiques/criticisms/suggestions for improvements. :-) Aris Katsaris (talk) 14:10, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

This is fantastic! I'm glad this has spawned other work. I am not familar with many of the acronyms used on your diagram, I was unaware there were so many different multi-national organisation within Africa. Could you provide a list of the acronyms and what they stand for? Wdcf (talk) 12:27, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

They can all be found mentioned in African_Economic_Community. I'll have to build a template with an image map that links to them, for convenience, as happens with the european diagram. But that's a bit more work than I have the time for, right now, so it may take me a while. Aris Katsaris (talk) 18:04, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Wow. How did you choose what to include? Perhaps make the CEPGL more obvious. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 13:06, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

I basically listed all the regional African organizations that are mentioned in African_Economic_Community, so I didn't really "choose". Some of these organizations may not being doing much work but they're still there, undissolved. Others are more active. Aris Katsaris (talk) 18:04, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Customs Union of Belarus, Kazakhstan and Russia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Customs_Union_of_Belarus,_Kazakhstan_and_Russia

add this in, kazakhstans little west part is part of europe--Karesu12340 (talk) 07:55, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Maybe if you ask nicely. Wdcf (talk) 16:18, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

I'll ask nicely for him, if that necessary. Haha. Could you please find a way to include the Belarus/Kazakhstan/Russia Customs Union? Therequiembellishere (talk) 23:35, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, is Kazakhstan *really* in Europe...should it *really* be on this diagram? Wdcf (talk) 11:27, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

A small portion of Kazakhstan is in what is usually considered Europe (west of the Ural Mountains/Ural River). According to List of transcontinental countries and Member states of the Council of Europe, about 4% of the population and about 4% of the area is in Europe. Comparing with East Thrace, Turkey has 12% of the population and 3% of the area in Europe. Additionally, this diagram mentions Armenia and Cyprus, which are to 100% located in Asia. It would be nice to have this customs union in the diagram since it would mean that all European UN members (+ the Vatican City) would appear somewhere. Currently, Belarus and Kazakhstan aren't members of anything, so they don't appear anywhere at all. (Stefan2 (talk) 09:02, 19 September 2011 (UTC))

It isn't up to us to decide to exclude Kazakhstan. The Council of Europe has stated that Kazakhstan has the right to apply for membership and, as it was stated above, states that are geographically Asian but culturally European are considered transcontinental could technically have less of a claim to be here than Kazakhstan. The question shouldn't be "should we have this customs union in the template because of Kazakstan" but "should we have this customs union in the template because of space/organisation/etc." Therequiembellishere (talk) 14:45, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

This customs union is similar to other bodies on the image (and in particular the EU customs union), so it would make sense to list it. I assume that we don't need to list the customs union of Switzerland, Liechtenstein and various EU exclaves in Switzerland. The problem, as I see it, is the Eurasian Union, which, according to some sources, is thought as a continuation of the customs union. Putin mentioned some other post-Soviet states (which are definitely not in Europe) as potential members, so we might risk having a situation where the union would have to be removed again, it no longer being a purely European body. (Stefan2 (talk) 08:06, 6 October 2011 (UTC))

Every group/organisation/union in this chart except Schengen is made specifically to do with some concept of Europe, and even Schengen is related due to its relation with the EU. The customs union was not made with Europe in mind. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 15:04, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Andorran euros

Andorra now has a legal monetary agreement with the European Union to mint euro coins. Article here. Therequiembellishere (talk) 23:35, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Has it been ratified yet? Do any coins actually exist? Andorran euro coins. Wdcf (talk) 11:39, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Because news barely trickles out of Andorra, I'm having a hard time finding out what's going on with the ratification. However, as the linked article states, minting won't happen until 2013. I don't know if the legality behind the euro requires the actual minting or just the agreement's ratification. Therequiembellishere (talk) 14:52, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, me neither. Although I do keep my eye out for such news. Wdcf (talk) 13:06, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

The ECB web site shows the coins of all current countries here. Whenever Andorra starts minting coins, I'd expect Andorra to appear in the list of countries to the right so that people can look at Andorran coins. (Stefan2 (talk) 18:41, 28 September 2011 (UTC))

Hmm...

Indeed, there are more of these than I'd originally imagined. What to do? Therequiembellishere (talk) 23:46, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Also this. Therequiembellishere (talk) 06:49, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

They can't all fit on one chart. It may be best to have separate charts if wanted, with separate subjects. One with the EU and related treaties/bodies, one for FTAs, etc. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 11:12, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Proven wrong you are at: File:Supranational European Bodies with NATO members-en.svg? TeraCard (talk) 09:16, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Belarus

Could you put Belarus out on the margin, or as was suggested with the Kazakhstan/Russia customs union? It may be isolated in Europe, but it definitely is part of it. As for Kazakhstan, the same principle applies to it as with Turkey, it needs only a little bit of its surface to be on Europe. It's moreover deemed to be a possible member to the Council of Europe (and it's a member of UEFA), were it not for human rights concerns. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.134.175.90 (talk) 06:34, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

This is not a Venn diagram of all countries in Europe - it is a diagram of Supranational European Organisations. If, one day, Belarus joins one of these organisations, then it will appear on the diagram, until such a day arrives, it will not feature on the diagram. Wdcf (talk) 00:25, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

And Belarus is part of the OSCE ... TeraCard (talk) 09:18, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Croatia

Since 1 July 2013 , Croatia is a part of the European Union. The owner of the file should update it. As Croatia is not yet part of the Eurozone neither the Schengen Area, it should be displayed in the graphic at the same level as Bulgaria, Romania and UK. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ji.rodriguezmarin (talk • contribs) 16:15, 25 September 2013 (UTC)