Talk:European Council on Foreign Relations

Jan 20, 2008 - There are a few factual mistakes on this page. I will correct. Plus, the map is confusing as the capitals are in the wrong places. ZS —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.3.176.24 (talk) 19:24, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Does somebody know how to take out the space between the article text and the list of names - it looks a bit clumsy as is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.3.176.24 (talk) 19:35, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Removing the advertisement tag?
The page looks neutral to me, with lots of inlined citations. User talk:212.225.174.69 added an advertisement tag last January, without explaining why. Do others agree it should be removed?Zigzig20s (talk) 11:18, 5 July 2014 (UTC)


 * I think it would be better to address the problems before removing the tag. The article does have a promotional tone and there are issues of sourcing. For instance
 * there is a series of quotations of people saying (nice) things about the organization, but they are from members of the organization. I don't think this is appropriate. It might be different if the quotations were used to illustrate what the council claims to be its objectives etc. but they seem to me more like "motherhoood and apple pie" platitudes. So I would remove the quotations.
 * All references used to support statements affecting the uniqueness, importance, or notability of the organization should be to independent sources. So non-independent sources used for such purposes should be replaced by better ones or removed (along with the statements backed up by those sources).
 * There seems to be a general promotional feeling about the article (how uniquely important we are, what we stand for, . . .)
 * So I would say, we should first deal with those problems and condense the article.

--Boson (talk) 13:17, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. This is why I asked the question here instead of removing it. (However, you should note that the tag was added by what looks like a temporary account...) I think the "awards and recognition" and "What Council Members have said about ECFR" sections should be removed (perhaps moved to the talkpage"). Would you agree? It should look more like Council on Foreign Relations. Would you like to do it?Zigzig20s (talk) 13:29, 5 July 2014 (UTC)


 * I have moved the quotations to the talk page. I think we could perhaps leave the first sentence of the "Awards and recognition section" (with changed formatting), since it does indicate notability etc., but I would remove the rest of the section as giving undue weight. --Boson (talk) 01:18, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

I don't think this looks like an advertisement anymore - only the Awards and recognition section is clearly positive (but that's kinda the idea), but the rest is now totally neutral. Vote for removing the disclaimer. -- 10:29 21 April 2015 (CET)

I have reworked the site over the last week or so and don't think there is any advertisement content anymore, so I removed the disclaimer. Hope you agree. --- 15:00 22 April 2015 (CET) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.150.39.6 (talk) 14:00, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you to the two commentators above for your work and opinions that the article is not written like an advertisement. But it would have been better if you had logged in or the statements would have come from users with accounts. Especially if one goes ahead to remove an advertisement tag. Unsurprisingly, I do not fully agree with the decision. Most of the description text about the Wider Europe program, for example, is identical to the text on the ECFR website. It actually includes a recommendation for political strategy of the EU, however general it may be. The Funding section suffers from this too, sounding rather inconspicuous, while "the usual suspects" such as NATO and other leading organizations from the geopolitical West are funding the think tank. I'll try to look into this and also think it would be helpful if we could get more - balanced and transparent - opinions on the matter of the tag. Themediaman (talk) 08:57, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

COI?
Some (probably non-overlapping) edits were made by single-purpose accounts,  ; there may be issues of conflict of interest and/or violation of username policy, that the users should be made aware of. --Boson (talk) 13:17, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

What Council Members have said about ECFR
moved to talk page as promotional --Boson (talk) 01:08, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

"The European Council on Foreign Relations is essential in creating channels for open debate in Europe. ECFR promotes the need for Europe to become an important, unified, courageous, innovative and coherent actor. I regard ECFR as pivotal in promoting this vision in a globalising world." Martti Ahtisaari

"The time has come for Europe to speak with one voice on key issues in our turbulent neighbourhood and an increasingly multi-polar world. ECFR helps us work out what we should say and how we can most effectively say it." Timothy Garton Ash

"The European Union has been a powerful example for integration, prolonged peace, and prosperity in a complex international environment. The international system of the 21st century needs a strong and united EU and ECFR makes an important contribution to this end." Joschka Fischer --

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on European Council on Foreign Relations. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110531182319/http://www.brookings.edu/reports/2011/0330_european_scorecard_vaisse.aspx to http://www.brookings.edu/reports/2011/0330_european_scorecard_vaisse.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:49, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on European Council on Foreign Relations. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110208215009/http://www.gotothinktank.com/wp-content/uploads/2010GlobalGoToReport_ThinkTankIndex_UNEDITION_15_.pdf to http://www.gotothinktank.com/wp-content/uploads/2010GlobalGoToReport_ThinkTankIndex_UNEDITION_15_.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:25, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Headquarters Berlin ?
On the ECFR website the offices are listed in alphabetical order. I can't find any reference to a "headquarter" there. In the german version of the article, user Abelribbink wants to change the "Hauptsitz" from London to Berlin. On what basis ?--IBits (talk) 10:41, 19 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Maybe because Britain is less European after leaving the EU? Berlin has a geographic advantage.
 * There could be an argument for developing a new category. When they take 1/3 of their funding from governments they are not an NGO any more, are they? I have seen the same thing with "NGO" German Marshall Plan or what it's called. There is an overlap in activities. How many organisations do they need to promote trans-Atlantic policies? 2001:8003:A070:7F00:2097:8B96:16A0:96F9 (talk) 06:02, 8 July 2024 (UTC)