Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of members of the ASEAN

List of members of the ASEAN

Self nomination. It is useful, comprehensive, factually accurate, stable, and well-organised, uncontroversial, complies with WP:MOS, and has a image in the public domain. See also: Wikipedia:Peer review/List of members of the ASEAN/archive1. --Howard the Duck | talk, 11:49, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is there really any good reason for this to be separate from Association of Southeast Asian Nations?? The article is certainly not so long that this couldn't be entirely included as prose... Besides, it certainly doesn't follow WP:SUMMARY to be that section's "Main Article" (although that admittedly have to specifically with Association of Southeast Asian Nations, not this list) Circeus 20:16, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So this should be merged here? --Howard t he Du c k 04:23, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Too short, not interesting enough. —Nightstallion (?) 17:43, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- It is because there are only ten countries? The ASEAN is like the Commonwealth of Nations. If the ASEAN is not interesting, then so is the Commonwealth. IMHO, this is as important as any of the list found at the list of countries at WP:FL. --Howard t he Du c k 04:23, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I don't agree with the little importance argument, but I think that given the small size of the list, more info could be included, like population, area, things like that, just the countries and the joining date is not the best Wikipedia can have, or is it? Cheers! Afonso Silva 18:33, 7 June 2006 (UTC) I'll support if you cite the references according to the policies, check List of municipalities of Portugal for an example and also if you develop the lead a little more. Apart from that, the list is complete and looks good. Afonso Silva 21:30, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- That's a great idea! I'd be incorporating those within the following days. --Howard the Duck 06:39, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - I did already for the member nations, I retained the format for other countries. --Howard t he Du c k 05:21, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'm against this. The list is fine as it is. We don't need to add unrelevant stuff just to fill up the page. CG 18:05, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - Why is that kind of info unrelevant? ASEAN is a political organization, having this kind of information is relevant. This way we can make comparisons and evaluate the relative power of its members. Afonso Silva 08:54, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      - Population does not equal power. I liked the previous list format. Rmhermen 22:05, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        Sure, everybody knows, for example, that Germany has the same power as Malta inside the EU. Come on, bigger countries have much more influence, in every organization. I don't understand why population and are are so unrelevant. Countries are geographic regions, where a number of people live. Afonso Silva 11:22, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        
        Take a look at these FLs List of countries, United Nations member states, List of members of the Commonwealth of Nations by date joined, and List of members of the Commonwealth of Nations by name. All these lists contains the informations stated in the title, with no unrelevant information and tables. A list about ASEAN countries should list the information related to this organisation which is membership date and status in the organisation, plus a map would help. CG 06:04, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        A list with population and area would be relevant in small lists such as to show more information about the subject. Also, many people may not know what the ASEAN is (as evidenced by the comments at the top), so additional info will help. Also, I've added a map. --Howard t he Du c k 06:18, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        
        I'm thinking that if the list is too short, why don't we incorporate it in the main ASEAN article, and delete this list? Plus I prefer if the map focuses only on the southeast Asia area and shows only members and observers states. CG 08:26, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        I think it is immaterial if the list is too short. It doesn't matter if an organization has has few or money members. For comparison, this list has 13 members, while the ASEAN list has 10. Not much of a difference if you ask me. Also, I'd be changing the map to one that you suggested. --Howard t he Du c k 08:34, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        
        Yes, but isn't it silly not to put this small list in the main article which would be the first thing a reader wants to know. And if the list of countries are all in the ASEAN page, why do we need a separate list? As for the map, you misunderstood me, It should only feature the southeast asia area, and not the whole world. CG 16:45, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        If yet to see an FL at the main page. And the Australia article lists the states and territories, which is then repeated at the States and territories of Australia. The map looks better for it shows where in the world the ASEAN is. Again, few people know where/what the ASEAN is. And the first they'll look for is a list of countries. --Howard t he Du c k 01:46, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        First, what I meant about the main page is the main article ASEAN. About the Australia example, the difference with this nomination is that the States and territories of Australia offers a lot more information (background, governors, parliaments...) and thus it's useful. While the nominated list is very small and could be easily inserted into the ASEAN article. CG 13:15, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        But additional info has been added already, those which are essential. --Howard t he Du c k 13:26, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        Like I said before, the information added is not useful and not specific or relevant to the context or the subject of the list (except the date and status), and should be removed from the list. CG 14:42, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        So finding out the capital, which country has the largest population and the heads of state are not useful when you're talking about international organizations such as this? If so, what should we replace it with? --Howard t he Du c k 14:51, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        
        We don't have to add information just to fill the page, the ones I've mentioned are sufficient for this list. Anyway, this discussion needs a third opinion. CG 15:57, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I've expanded the lead and added references. Hope those who oppose may take a peek and see if its good enough already. --Howard t he Du c k 02:19, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support - It meets the criteria. We have smaller FL (e.g. List of Canadian provinces and territories by population). I don't see any reason for not supporting a complete, well referenced list. Afonso Silva 12:00, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support - It looks great. 23prootie 03:59, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I still suppport it but could you put a color-coded Southeast Asia map which shows colors that correspond to the date a member joined. 23prootie 07:51, 14 June 2006 (UTC)23prootie[reply]
- I'l request it again. The map is all grey space, could we zoom and show only the southeast asian region? CG 09:01, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Ok, I'll work it on the weekend. Thanks for all of your suggestions. --Howard t he Du c k 03:00, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]