Talk:List of current state leaders by date of assumption of office/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Brazil

With the possibility that President Dilma Rousseff will be impeached & thus (according to Brazil's Constitution) have her powers & duties suspended during the impeachment trial. Will we really need to list Vice President Michel Temer, while he performs those powers & duties as acting president? Afterall, Rousseff will still be President until/if she's convicted & removed from office. GoodDay (talk) 12:35, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

While Cristina Fernández de Kirchner was twice being medically treated, I listed Amado Boudou as the Acting President of Argentina on this page, and kept President Fernández de Kirchner listed as President. While Traian Băsescu was being impeachment for the second time, Crin Antonescu was listed as the Acting President of Romania on this page, and President Băsescu was still listed as President.– Jwkozak91 (talk) 14:04, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

We should start the practice of going with only footnotes, in these situations. GoodDay (talk) 14:15, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Since these people are the legal (and continued) possessor of the office on the one hand, and the effective (albeit temporary) exerciser of the presidential duties on the other, they should both be listed. ZBukov (talk) 15:06, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Since this is Wikipedia, surely the solution should be to follow whatever reliable sources do, rather than engaging in original research. Which reliable sources do we usually base this list on? Pburka (talk) 15:39, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Well, now this debate is no longer theoretical; we need to apply a decision within the next 24 hours IMHO.– Jwkozak91 (talk) 11:05, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

It's no longer a concern for me. If you want to list Temer, go for it. GoodDay (talk) 12:57, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

We should clarify though, that Rousseff is still President of Brazil. Suspension of her powers & duties, would be a more accurate description. GoodDay (talk) 14:28, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Michel Temer, Albert II of Monaco, etc.

Recommend we List Temer at August 31, when he actually took office as President of Brazil. Not May 12, when he merely assumed presidential powers & duties while Vice President. GoodDay (talk) 18:18, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

I disagree. Since May 12, the person discharging the duties of the Presidency -- meeting with diplomats, signing laws, even opening the Olympics -- has been Temer. On August 31 his title changed, but he has held office de facto since May 12. Dralwik|^{Have a Chat} 23:19, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Seeing as we've got Albert II of Monaco's reign corrected as beginning April 6, 2005. Again, we should have Temer's tenure as President of Brazil beginning August 31, 2016. In fact, we should also remove the officials who aren't & never were state leaders, but only acting state leaders. That's the acting presidents, acting prime ministers & regents. GoodDay (talk) 11:58, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

I reverted the date for Albert II de Monaco to March because there was no reason given for that change. The prince-regent was also head of state. Acting heads of states are heads of state. Wykx (talk) 21:37, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

The article should be reduced to just 'heads of state & government', IMHO. GoodDay (talk) 21:45, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

How would you manage the title of the article then?? Wykx (talk) 11:30, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

The acting presidents & regents have not assumed the office, but merely assumed the powers & duties of the office. We should remove them.

Adamantly oppose this. Temer is the person who has exercised the duties of the office since he became Acting President, and this article should reflect the person who has been signing laws, meeting diplomats, making public appearances, etc. IMO the change from acting to full President is a wording technicality that should give way to Temer's de facto leadership. Dralwik|^{Have a Chat} 17:28, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Vajiralongkorn, King of Thailand

There's sources that he's been proclaimed king, retroactive back to his father's death. Therefore, I placed his accession as being October 13, 2016. GoodDay (talk) 16:39, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

We should still have a footnote pointing out Prem Tinsulanonda's regency until December 1. I'd put it in, but I'm on mobile right now. Dralwik|^{Have a Chat} 00:00, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

This article is for those who are currently in office. Therefore, Prem should be excluded. GoodDay (talk) 00:02, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

No, we note regencies for current rulers in footnotes on the current ruler. See Bhumibol's old entry where we had a footnote on his regency back in the 1940s (or the current King of Norway for another example). Dralwik|^{Have a Chat} 02:52, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Yemen

Should this 'salvation government' in Yemen be included in this list? Yemen's Houthi rebels unveil 'salvation' government Wykx (talk) 12:42, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Akihito

Just a note: Plans are in the works to amend the Japanese Constitution, to allow Emperor Akihito to abdicate on January 1, 2019. GoodDay (talk) 02:43, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

South Korea

With the removal from office (via impeachment conviction) of President Park on 10 March 2017, a dispute has broken out as to which date should be used for the beginning of Prime Minister Hwang's tenure as Acting President. Should we go with 9 December 2016, when Hwan became Acting President upon the suspension of President Park's powers & duties? or should we go with 10 March 2017. GoodDay (talk) 15:37, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

He was already Acting President during the suspension, hence 9 December 2016 seems the right date. Wykx (talk) 21:21, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Cook Islands and Niue

Since Niue and Cook Islands are actually Sovereign States in free association, and having diplomatic relations with several countries. Shouldn't they be represented here? Even though they don't have UN Membership? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.221.36.121 (talk) 14:39, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Kazakh Soviet Socialist Republic In office 22 June 1989 – 14 December 1991 а не с 1990 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.112.23.213 (talk) 07:08, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Artur Rasizade

20 July 1996 – 4 August 2003 (1st time) потом Acting Prime Minister: 6 August 2003 – 4 November 2003 Prime Minister: 4 November 2003 – present — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.112.23.213 (talk) 08:18, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Elizabeth II

To a less familiar reader, Elizabeth II's entry in this article, is a tad confusing. We have her column 'Assumed office', showing February 6, 1952 (for all the realms) & yet in the column 'Office', we've got different dates in each country, with the exceptions of: UK, Canada, Australia & NZ. GoodDay (talk) 16:32, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

I agree. But the alternative is creating thirteen separate entries for the same person (as per the various dates on which her realms became independent). So this unique circumstance of her being a head of multiple states only offers two options both of which will be a bit confusing to a less familiar reader. ZBukov (talk) 21:14, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

I know Elizabeth's reign was discussed extensively above, but might it be clearer if we changed the 'Assumed office' date to read "February 6, 1952, or upon independence", or something similar? Pburka (talk) 21:23, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Suppose, it's a temporary situation, as her successors reigns will all begin on the exact same date. GoodDay (talk) 22:09, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Except if the likes of Anguilla, Bermuda or Cook Islands become independent realms during a future reign. :) ZBukov (talk) 12:26, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Titles

A handful of leaders have titles in the list (Prince, Sir, Sheikh, Archbishop). I started removing them, then realized how many there were. I don't think we should include titles. Every state leader has at least one title, and often more than one (Elizabeth II has a whole list of titles!) Adding all the titles would be messy, and it could be complicated to decide which title to use. I propose that all titles be removed. Pburka (talk) 00:04, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Nazarbayev start date

To avoid further edit warring, I am arguing here that Nursultan Nazarbayev of Kazakhstan should be listed at the 1984 date, including his tenure as the Prime Minister-equivalent of the Kazakh SSR. This is using a combination of two precedents we already follow for this page: 1) That a leader is dated at the start of their earliest leadership position that forms a continuous period to the present day. For example, Paul Biya of Cameroon is listed under 1975 (Prime Minister from 1975 to 1982, then directly to the Presidency since 1982). 2) A leader of a subdivision/protectorate, etc. that becomes independent has the pre-independence time counted for dating. For instance, Salva Kiir Mayardit of South Sudan is under 2005, although his country was part of Sudan until 2011. Combine these two rules, and Nazarbayev is dated at 1984, since he has been a head of state or government of Kazakhstan continuously since 1984. Indeed, this combination already applies to the footnotes on Filip Vujanović, the current President of Montenegro, which lists his service as Prime Minister of what was then a province of Yugoslavia/Serbia and Montenegro. (His service being noncontinuous relegates that to a footnote though.) Dralwik|^{Have a Chat} 22:37, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Naruhito's accession date

I suspect there 'may be' a dispute over this, when Naruhito becomes emperor of Japan. Many sources are using the date May 1, 2019 as the accession date, but they're also using May 1, 2019 as when the new era begins. Here's the problem. In Japan an emperor's accession date is different from his era-beginning date. Why? the era-beginning date is always the first full day of the emperor's reign. This would mean that Naruhito's accession date would be April 30, when his father abdicates. Unless Akihito is abdicating at 'mid-night'. GoodDay (talk) 17:35, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 February 2019

2409:4052:90F:CBEF:0:0:2709:18A1 (talk) 12:08, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

2409:4052:90F:CBEF:0:0:2709:18A1 (talk) 12:08, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

• No evident request. Tiderolls 12:21, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 February 2019

2409:4052:90F:CBEF:0:0:2709:18A1 (talk) 12:14, 20 February 2019 (UTC)2409:4052:90F:CBEF:0:0:2709:18A1 (talk) 12:14, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

2409:4052:90F:CBEF:0:0:2709:18A1 (talk) 12:14, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

• No evident request. Tiderolls 12:22, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 March 2019

2405:205:1300:164B:0:0:76C:98A0 (talk) 05:47, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Danski454 (talk) 17:07, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Nursultan Nazarbayev

First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Kazakh Soviet Socialist Republic In office 22 June 1989 – 14 December 1991 потом 1st President of Kazakhstan Incumbent Assumed office 16 December 1991 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.112.23.213 (talk) 07:13, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Nazarbayev is the leader of the ruling party in a managed democracy and the permanent chairman of an empowered National Security Council. Furthermore, both of the people in the offices of the President and Prime Minister owe their positions to him.– Jwkozak91 (talk) 08:06, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Merging pre-1990 groups

This was suggested to be brought up here, so here it is. Is there any thoughts towards merging everything pre-1990 (or even pre-1970 or -1980) into one group? As it stands the pre-1970 has two people (Elizabeth II and Hassanal Bolkiah), while the 1970s has 6 names and 1980s has 7. Seems logical to merge a couple of them, no? Kaiser matias (talk) 02:47, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Merging was the best move, as the number of heads of state pre-1990 are decreasing, due to death, abdication/resignation & expiration of term(s) of office. GoodDay (talk) 02:51, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

I support this, to streamline the tables. This is an edit that will only become more fitting with time. Dralwik|^{Have a Chat} 04:36, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

(outdent) Now that yet another 1980s name has been removed (Omar al-Bashir), I think it may be appropriate to move forward here. Kaiser matias (talk) 01:07, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

 Done partially. Boldly did the first part (merged "Prior to 1970" and "1970s" --> into one "Prior to 1980" section since the first of the two only had two individuals), but didn't do anything with the 1980s section, as that would need to have further discussion. Paintspot Infez (talk) 19:28, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Please see discussion above about groupings. We should discuss grouping changes first here before making any changes. Believe it or not, there ire s a lot of strong opinio on both sides here, so unilateral changes should not be made until there is consensus.rns — Preceding unsigned comment added by Memworking (talk • contribs) 16:34, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

@Memworking: First, there was one discussion about the dates back in 2014, and at the time you were the only one to express any opposition. That seems to be the case here again, with several others seemingly showing support to condense the tables a bit. It really just seems like you are the only one against it for some reason. Kaiser matias (talk) 06:49, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

@Kaiser matias: Fair enough. I am not opposed to the change per se. I just think (i) we should discuss it first and (ii) apply consistent standards. So, maybe something like: "Going forward, we would recommend combining dates/decades where there are five or fewer names associated with that date/decade. We will make that change assuming no one raises any objections prior to 24 April 2019 at 5 pm GMT." Kaiser matias - if that works for you I will edit this Talk page accordingly.

Thanks. In a similar topic, Nursultan Nazarbayev should be removed from the list, and I see he has been but keeps being restored. The sole post he retains, Chairman of the Security Council, is not a state leader position, and while Nazarbayev arguably does still hold influence over the Kazakhstani government, to argue he holds a legitimate leadership position is incorrect. Kaiser matias (talk) 21:53, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

I'm not sure about that, there'd need to be a separate discussion on that one. Paintspot Infez (talk) 13:39, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Date groupings

This may have been discussed already, but can't we organize the date groupings a bit more logically? For example, the first grouping goes from 1946-1994. Why?

I would suggest groupings like: 1970 and Prior, 1971-1980, 1981-1990, 1991-2000, and then maybe by year thereafter. Yes, this adds to the number of groupings, but it would make it less random and more logically organized than it is now.

It used to be grouped this way - I don't know why it was changed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Memworking (talk • contribs) 14:00, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

I would suggest that the group prior to 1970 up to 1990 will be merged. The number of state leaders who started before 1990 is getting smaller bit by bit. Albertus correctus magnus (talk) 20:28, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Support. This would give the first block more of an equal length with the other groupings. Dralwik|^{Have a Chat} 15:13, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Oppose. Yes, the number of pre-1990 leaders is getting smaller. But why shouldn't the size of the groupings reflect that? Who says all the groupings need to be the same size? Doesn't it make sense that the pre-1970s grouping stays smaller, which proves the point that the size of that group is in fact dwindling? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Memworking (talk • contribs) 20:56, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Going forward, we would recommend combining dates/decades where there are five or fewer names associated with that date/decade. We will make that change assuming no one raises any objections prior to 24 April 2019 at 5 pm GMT. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Memworking (talk • contribs) 19:44, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Why was the President of Panama removed?

The President of Panama was removed from the list without explanation. What happened? Did he die? Was there a coup?

206.205.117.10 (talk) 18:02, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Small font

What does it mean when an entry is written in small font? Does it mean that the person is the de facto state leader instead of the de jure one? If so then it should be explained in the article. JIP | Talk 11:55, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

It is used for acting leaders and for the Governors-General of the Commonwealth Realms. Mtminchi08 (talk) 01:36, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Paul Kagame 1994-2000

Hello,

Paul Kagame is widely recognized as de facto leader of Rwanda between 1994 and his accession to the office of President on 22 April 2000. During this time, he was Vice-President (office taken on 19 July 1994) and leader of the RPF, the dominant party (having assumed control in exile in 1990). This period is also described as a triumvirate between Kagame, nominal President Pasteur Bizimungu and until 1995 nominal Prime Minister Faustin Twagiramungu. This leadership role is mentioned and sourced several times in the article, including lede, § Vice President and Minister of Defence and § Accession.

This type of leaders from behind without an actual title of head of state or government are usually included in this list, such as communist system first/general secretaries, Iranian or North Korean Supreme Leader, Myanmar State Counsellor etc.

For these reasons, I suggest for the purpose of this list to consider Kagame's tenure from 19 July 1994, when he starts to be Vice-President. One could consider that his role as leader of dominant party RPF in fact started in 1990, but that would be overreach and I could not find a reliable source stating any actual date when he takes this position, besides the death of his predecessor on 2 October 1990, a date where he was abroad and did not immediately succeed. Place Clichy (talk) 18:29, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

@Jwkozak91: Despite not answering in this discussion, you have several times reverted this mention about Kagame being de facto leader of the country since 1994 [1] and introduced wording which I find incorrect: Kagame was not "Acting Head of State" between 1994 and 24 March 2000 ([2]) nor "Acting President" ([3]) as there was a President in office during this period, namely Pasteur Bizimungu.

He was however the real leader of the country, as attested by the sources, and held a number of offices which I summed up in this edit: Vice-President, Minister of Defence, head of the Army and of the single party. Neither was he head of government. His role during this period is therefore similar to other 'leadership from behind' positions which we consider for the purpose of this list, such as communist system first/general secretaries, Iranian or North Korean Supreme Leader, Myanmar State Counsellor etc. and should be presented as such. Place Clichy (talk) 16:37, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Having received no answer, I'm reinstating a wording mentioning his actual titles during the 1994-2000 period, using footnotes, replacing "Acting Head of State" which is actually untrue. Place Clichy (talk) 07:48, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Mozambique?

The table currently has Carlos Agostinho do Rosário listed under 17 January 2020, when he was reconfirmed as Prime Minister following the re-inauguration of President Nyusi. However, our source, rulers.org, does not have this cabinet shuffle listed as interrupting Rosário's tenure. Should Rosário be listed under his initial date of 17 January 2015 to match pages like List of prime ministers of Mozambique? Dralwik|^{Have a Chat} 01:04, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

The source Rulers January 2020 says on January 9 'Mozambique: President Filipe Nyusi dismisses Prime Minister Carlos Agostinho do Rosário and Interior Minister Basílio Monteiro so that they can take up seats in parliament. After being sworn in for his second term on January 15, however, Nyusi on January 17 confirms do Rosário as prime minister.' Another source Reuters says 'Mozambique's President Filipe Nyusi kept Carlos Agostinho do Rosário as prime minister'. Wykx (talk) 23:37, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

True, but rulers.org also does not list him as leaving the prime ministry. On the Mozambique page, there is no listing of an absent office for that time gap, and do Rosário has an uninterrupted tenure listed. It seems that the dismissal was a formality and that do Rosário remained the prime minister through that gap. Dralwik|^{Have a Chat} 04:46, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and put do Rosário back to January of 2015, to match the Mozambique page on rulers.org. It seems to be a distinct case from say, Greece where a caretaker PM was appointed to replace the outgoing PM between administrations. Dralwik|^{Have a Chat} 20:46, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Ndlovukati of eSwatini

The Ndlovukati article notes that "The title is given preferentially to the mother of the reigning King (styled the Ngwenyama, "Lion of Swaziland"), or to another female royal of high status if the King's mother has died. Indlovukati rules alongside the Ngwenyama".

I do not believe Ntfombi of Eswatini has ever been included in this list in the years I've been watching it. Granted, she only has ceremonial powers but we include other such leaders. Should she be added to this list? Mtminchi08 (talk) 03:58, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Which other such leader? Wykx (talk) 20:35, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Should we include de facto ruler Mohammed bin Salman

By this reference Mohammed bin Salman is called de facto ruler of Saudi Arabia. Wykx (talk) 23:11, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

No. His father hasn't designated him regent. GoodDay (talk) 23:26, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Indeed but isn't he de facto? Wykx (talk) 06:53, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

I would support listing him as the de facto ruler of the country, using his appointment as Crown Prince and Deputy Prime Minister on 21 June 2017 as his starting point. We can cite news sources like the BBC article as explanations for his unique listing, similar to how we still have Nursultan Nazarbayev on the list for still being the de facto power in Kazakhstan. Dralwik|^{Have a Chat} 01:17, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

I would argue against including him at this point, and anyone who is "de facto" the leader. I think it should be restricted to those who actually hold a title that makes them a state leader (so head of state or government), as it establishes firm guidelines on who to include and who not to. Kaiser matias (talk) 21:11, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

References

Niue and Cook Islands

Many countries recognize Niue and Cook Islands as independent countries, I believe it is necessary to add them to the list. Renan Rabbit (talk) 14:57, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

I don't see them in List of states with limited recognition or List of sovereign states. There were some long discussions about them being added on these pages and for now the entries have not been added. Wykx (talk) 19:52, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Elizabeth II (order of first four entries)

Why are the Commonwealth Realms, as of 1952, of which Elizabeth II is currently Monarch listed in the order UK, Australia, Canada, New Zeland? As Elizabeth II's Coronation Oath (https://www.royal.uk/coronation-oath-2-june-1953) mentioned them by name in their order of seniority, I think that Canada should precede Australia rather than vice versa. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.78.82.8 (talk) 21:19, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

UK gets top billing, because it's the realm she's most associated with & lives in. As for the other 3? they're listed in alphabetical order. GoodDay (talk) 21:21, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

But, following those three, the remaining 12 are sorted are by length of tenure of reign, not alphbetically. Jamaica is next even though, alphabetically, it comes after Barbados. That is what seems inconsistent.213.78.82.8 (talk) 22:03, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Oh, well I'll let somebody else handle that. Being as I'm Canadian, it might be viewed as though I were showing favouritism. GoodDay (talk) 22:05, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. Let's see how long we have to wait for modest Australian to apply an edit! 213.78.82.8 (talk) 22:08, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

I would stick to alphabetical order and put Australia, Canada, New Zealand, UK. For Macron, Andorra is already listed before France, by alphabetical order.Wykx (talk) 06:34, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

TBH, the UK should be at the top, as it's the realm she lives in & is most associated with. GoodDay (talk) 06:39, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

So France should be before Andorra for Macron? The ranking shouldn't depend of the head of state. How countries are ranked at UN for example? By alphabetic order. Wykx (talk) 06:48, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

If Macron was Andorra's sole head of state, then yes. However, Andorra has two heads of state who are not both heads of state of France, so we can't do that. GoodDay (talk) 14:53, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

I don't understand why it would make a difference?? Wykx (talk) 06:48, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

To me, it is not obvious that it makes a difference, either. I had not noticed that Andorra was listed before France, but it does not seem compelling one way or the other for the order of Canada and Autralia, because Andorra comes before France according to both historical seniority (the Head of State of France was joint Head of State of Andorra before the founding of even the first French Republic) and alphabetical order. Applying those two arguments (either of which may be in force for Andorra and France) to Elizabeth II, either the UK should be first and Canada should precede Australia or the UK should be fourth and the remaining realms remain sorted by the tenure of the currrent Monarch while France should go before Andorra. The argument for the current arrangement is that the UK is special and should go first (exempt for alphabetic ordering), but, in that case France is special, and should be exempt from alphbetic order and from ordering by seniority. 213.78.82.8 (talk) 10:47, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

I'd have no problem with putting France before Andorra, if the Macron was Andorra's sole head of state. GoodDay (talk) 12:46, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

This article is about "by date of assumption of office" so for EII this is the same date for 4 states. There is no specifity to highlight here. That's why alphabetical order seems perfectly adequate. Wykx (talk) 15:14, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Wouldn't stress too much over it. The countries will be re-arranged again, when (if ever) Charles ascends the throne(s). GoodDay (talk) 15:18, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Recommend we go with United Kingdom, Canada, Australia then New Zealand on the basis of the current ages of the realms, as tiebreakers. The UK was founded in 1801, then 1930/40's - Canada founded in 1867 - Australia in 1901, then New Zealand in 1907. The entire list of the Commonwealth realms is currently inconsistent, with a mixture of accession dates & alphabetical order. GoodDay (talk) 12:53, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Of course that is fine with me as it matches my initial instinct; I searched for the Coronation Oath, as sworn in 1953, for support. I perceived an analogy with the ordering of US states by admission to the Union, with date of ratification of the Constitution as the tiebreaker in that case. I will now step back from the France/Andorra question. 213.78.82.8 (talk) 15:37, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Regarding "upcoming leader" section

Emir of Wikipedia had made the proposal to remove upcoming state leader from this page, which last I checked had been on this page for the past few years. This would be a major change to the information provided by this page. I wish a discussion is valid before making this major change. WeifengYang (talk) 21:03, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

As stated above I propose it is removed. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:04, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Which talk page did you propose it in? I didn't see a discussion page regarding this issue. Would be kind to see how that discussion unfoldedWeifengYang (talk) 21:28, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

I am proposing it here. The discussion is unfolding right now. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:32, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

In terms of the existence of this page, the first verifiable existence (and it been a mainstay here) of the "list of upcoming leader" appeared on 21 May 2010. This page emerged in 2006. So for its 14 years of existence 10 years had it include the "upcoming leader" page.

Beyond this, the inclusion of information regarding "president-elect" has been a feature in other related pages too. the "List of current heads of state and government" page has president-elect included too, see the Dominican Republic link that included President-elect Luis Abinader. More Importantly, it appears as not only relevant information, but important information to preempt edit war, as demonstrated by the series of edit that potentially led to this section staying. Due to above reasons, I propose the reinstatement of this section. WeifengYang (talk) 21:54, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Maybe we should ask for a WP:3O. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 22:02, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Seconded. WeifengYang (talk) 22:04, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

I believe this section should be kept, as it has been on this page for the majority of its existence and is relevant information. I would, however, suggest we only include those who hold the office of president-elect or something akin to it. I feel the inclusion of someone like Leo Varadkar, who is technically upcoming by party agreement, would not fit but a president-elect who will assume office in a relatively short period of time deserves to be noted on this page. LABoy12 (talk) 00:08, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

I'd also support keeping it in. So long as upcoming leaders have sources confirming their appointments and dates, which has been true as long as I've been watching the page (some time now), I don't see it to be an issue. That it is updated frequently enough to not lag behind and be outdated is also a key point I think. Kaiser matias (talk) 14:45, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

I support keeping the section too: I consulted the page quite frequently and I always found that the information provided in that section corresponded almost always to the criteria to be formally elect/appointed to the office, but only waiting the official date of starting of it (only recently some cases were not following this ratio). If we stick to this criteria, it could be a useful and relevant information to provide. Congolandia.g (talk) 16:55, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Consensus can change. Just because a page has been one for the majority of its existence doesn't mean it can't been edited. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 16:18, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

In addition, if you look at the source of the "list of upcoming leader" section, there is many pre-formatted edits (e.g. upcoming Guyanese president status unclear, since no confirmation it is hidden with "<-!") that is hidden from the article page. Given the time-contingent aspect of this page that require frequent update ASAP, this also provides a very convenient toolkit for the update and editing of this page. WeifengYang (talk) 21:00, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Removal of Saad Hariri

Saad Hariri has been on the upcoming leaders section for months and still has not taken office. His date of assumption of office changes every month. Is he taking office or not? Hikerblunt01 (talk) 17:21, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Lebanese politics is complicated, with a lot of factions that don't necessarily want to work to a consensus. If Saad Hariri is finally completely frustrated and gives back his cabinet formation mandate to Michel Aoun, then Saad will be taken off the upcoming leaders table. – Jwkozak91 (talk) 08:57, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

President of Iran

First we had him taking office on August 8, 2021. Now we have it as August 5. Why isn't he taking office on August 3, like several of his predecessors had? GoodDay (talk) 15:21, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Samoa: standard for both whether or not incoming PM is in power and when the date start?

Due to yesterday's Court of Appeal ruling, which stated the PM Fiame, the incoming PM of Samoa, is in power since 24 May, and that the first government meeting happened today, I was wondering if we can now list PM Fiame as incumbent, as her own Wikipedia page indicate?

In addition, I was wondering if we should list Fiame as incumbent since 23 July (yesterday in Samoa time) 2021, or 24 May 2021? The precedence on this page seems to indicate for the latter:

• As we can see, in the case of Adama Barrow, President of The Gambia, he is listed as inaugurated on 19 January 2021, his legal inauguration date. His disputed predecessor, Yayha Jammeh, only relinquished power on 21 January 2021, which in between the three days Jammeh has de facto control over the country during this constitutional crisis.
• Another case that is of longer date, is the 2010–2011 Ivorian crisis, where the current president, Alassane Ouattara is listed as inaugurated on 4 December 2010, while his disputed predecesor, Laurent Gbagbo, only lost effective power in the capital on 11 April 2011.

Thus, the second question concerning the Samoa case is that, even if we are not to list Fiame as inaugurated, in the (now very likely) event that Fiame is inaugurated and PM Tuilaepa either concede or is forced out, which date shall we list? will it be 24 May (which is the legal date according to the court ruling), today (23 July) (the day with the first government meeting and Court confirmation), or some future date when Fiame is undisputed as the new PM of Samoa? Wish for a thorough discussion on this that can be cited for future leadership dispute cases too. --WeifengYang (talk) 00:36, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Wish to also mention Jwkozak91 here. --WeifengYang (talk) 00:39, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

References

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Flag of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:36, 19 August 2021 (UTC)