Talk:List of administrative divisions by country/Archive 1

United States
Didn't really want to comment at this level. Anyway, the subdivision for the US is wrong. I don't really know enough to fix it, because it varies on a State level. So anyway here is the problem. The Division in the state of New York, for example, is this State->County->Town->Village/City/town/et cetera. As an example the Town of Poughkeepsie includes both the City and the town of Poughkeepsie. Within the town part of the Town of Poughkeepsie there are further subdivisions. Different states don't necessarily have this division. I've run across various such sub-divisions in numerous states. But even within NY state there is a problem, because New York City has a further distinction with burroughs. New York County contains 2 burroughs, but New York County is a subdivision of New York City. Administratively, though New York city is complicated. Generally, in NY state the Town is an administrative unit, and the town (within, yeah connfusing)/village/whatever is also a separate administrative unit. Some other states call what NY calls a Town a Township with towns and cities inside (Township->Town vs Town->Town). --Celtic hackr (talk) 15:50, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't say it's wrong, just incomplete. I'm guessing whoever made that entry originally purposely left it vague because of the complexity you refer to.  If anything, perhaps a note about how some MCDs are further divided into smaller units would be sufficient.  --Lasunncty (talk) 02:05, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I have rewritten this cell. -- Beland (talk) 23:55, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Maldives
Could anyone change the new administrative division of Maldives? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.170.101.80 (talk) 16:13, 27 November 2012 (UTC)


 * This appears to have since been done. -- Beland (talk) 08:41, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Flemish
There is no such thing as a Flemish language. The official languages of Belgium are Dutch, French and German, Flemish is not. It is not an official term, not even recognised by linguists, and can mean French Flemish, West Flemish, East Flemish... Brabantian or Limburgish, the other Dutch dialects of Belgium (which are both spoken in the Netherlands as well and thus cannot be called Belgian, let alone Flemish, which is a group of other dialects) and especially Standard Dutch can't at all be called Flemish. It is a popular misconception, but strictly incorrect. For those who do not believe me : check the pages on Belgium, Dutch language, Flanders, Flemish (linguistics)...--Roofbird (talk) 05:47, 5 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Flemish is no longer mentioned in this article. -- Beland (talk) 08:45, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Palau
According to States of Palau, these are 1st level, not second level subdivisions. -- User:Docu
 * The article has since been changed to reflect that. -- Beland (talk) 00:16, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Language choice
Why are administrative divisions in this article given in languages other than English? I'm pretty sure English Wikipedia's naming conventions prefer English when this is an option. In fact the links on this page invariably link to articles with English language names. Vvelaya'at -> Provence etc... Blue-Haired Lawyer 18:44, 25 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Because as you will see by many of the articles, some of the names are proper in English. As for the Kenya names you attempted to change, the articles that they wikilink to are in correct English form. This table is a global reference for someone and it is proper per country. Rarelibra (talk) 23:47, 25 October 2008 (UTC)


 * You appear to have confused me for someone else. I've never touched the Kenya entry. I am aware that the wikilinks link to the correct English form, but that doesn't answer the question over why the English names aren't used here. Using lots of word which are all both unintelligible and unpronounceable to English speakers appears to rather pointless. Blue-Haired Lawyer 11:33, 26 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Negative. There was a lot of hard work put into this table for accuracy and it is a very applicable reference. Again, many times over there are proper articles due to the naming. Rarelibra (talk) 14:02, 26 October 2008 (UTC)


 * It appears quite clear to me that the rule on English Wikipedia is that English should be used. Why should an exception be made here? Blue-Haired Lawyer 15:25, 26 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Because the majority of us that have used and contributed to this have consensus. Again, the links are to the proper pages on wiki, and it is vital to have this reference for those who wish to see the total picture by country. Rarelibra (talk) 20:17, 26 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I changed the Kenyan ones, English is an official language in Kenya (and it is used, education is primarily in english) and since these english names are available and used, I would think the preference would be for the english. This is like the south africa entry, the names are in english, not any of the other 10 official languages they could be in. 24.255.4.96 (talk) 19:48, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

As stated - update the numbers, but a lot of us have worked hard to get this table as accurate and detailed as it is. So please do not alter the names. Thanks! Rarelibra (talk) 21:51, 28 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I am trying to improve the accuracy of those names. I have not changed any of them back, but I would appreciate the reasons for putting Kenya's divisions in Swahili. If the convention in this table is to use local languages I do not know enough of wikipedia policies to debate that, but for consistency within this table it appears to me the Kenyan names should be in English. Look at the entries for Botswana, Gambia, Gabon, South Africa, Nigeria and Seychelles. All have multiple languages including English and the names are in English. Why is the Kenyan one not in English when the language is used by the government and used in schools (When I was in primary school (public) I learned about provinces, districts and so on, not mkoa and wilaya). I am not saying the Swahili terms are not used but that the English terms are used just as much, if not more especially since most Kenyans will encounter these terms in school, which as I have said are taught primarily in English. 24.255.4.96 (talk) 23:59, 28 October 2008 (UTC)


 * My point is don't just attempt to use a couple of countries - look at many of the other countries. The key here is the wikilink is proper, and the local name is used in an attempt for a global picture. This debate has gone on under many of the pages for them to be in English - but this table has been built with hard work. We can probably change the first and second layers of the Kenyan names - but the remaining layers - especially if they don't translate - will remain the same. I just don't see the point - what next, pick on Poland, Lithuania, and others? If we want to switch the Kenya entry to multiple use like Botswana, etc. that is fine. My whole point is we have BOTH here and I didn't like the fact of someone coming along and changing it only into English and losing the multiple part. It is a VERY useful reference to have. Rarelibra (talk) 05:12, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Third opinion
Hi everyone. I popped over from Third Opinion to help you settle the dispute.

Let me see if I've got it correct: one person says "we should always use English," while the other person says "we don't have to." Is that roughly correct?

I've looked through the relevant WP:MOS sections and related pages, and the one part that leaped out at me was: Foreign words should be used sparingly. It looks to me like far too many foreign words are used in this page. I would suggest that the English terms be used, with the local terms in parentheses.

So for example:


 * 12 qarku

Should be


 * 12 counties (qarku) or prefectures (prefekturat)

This ensures that the English term is given prominence (per MOS), while still including the local term. I find the lack of references worrying, though.

I'll be keeping this page on my watchlist if you have any questions. // roux   13:59, 28 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Roux - appreciate the input. That is actually what we were doing all along (with some exceptions overlooked, I'm sure). The whole debate started from someone who swept through and REMOVED all of the native terms - which takes away from the encyclopedic value. Rarelibra (talk) 13:14, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

New Discussion
A discussion has been started at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries/Lists of countries which could affect the inclusion criteria and title of this and other lists of countries. Editors are invited to participate. Pfainuk talk 11:53, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * See WikiProject Countries for result. -- Beland (talk) 00:57, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Incomplete
I think all that is listed in List of sovereign states need to be listed here. For example the Falkland Islands are not present in this article. FairfaxMoresby (talk) 14:15, 8 January 2010 (UTC)


 * The Falklands have since been added to the table. -- Beland (talk) 01:49, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Length
I realize this table is long, but am not sure if it would benefit from being split; I'm imagining anyone wanting to print it would prefer a continuous version...? Regards, David Kernow (talk) 05:55, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Perhaps separate pages could be created for each continent? Say at Administrative divisions of Europe etc.? --Astrokey 44 11:42, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I oppose spliting. The table is not that large, and there is a definite benefit from having all info in one place. Renata 15:46, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Move
This article superseeds List of subnational entities, because it is about the same thing and is far better. I suggest simply moving all the content there. If anyone cared to clean up that list, it would look something really similar to this table. No need to duplicate content, just replace some old ughlee inaccurate list with this nice table. Renata 15:46, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed. That list looks terrible with redlinks and arbitrarily chosen maps --Astrokey 44 22:36, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * That article now redirects here. -- Beland (talk) 00:11, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Kosovo?
Kosovo has been listed, but is not properly recognized as a "country" by the United Nations. Should it even be in this list? Such a situation would then cascade into allowing listing of other such independent or autonomous areas, regions, etc. I say we should remove it. Rarelibra (talk) 15:38, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Non-UN countries like Kosovo are now in a separate "Other states" table. -- Beland (talk) 08:43, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Faroes & Greenland
I do not think it is appropriate to display the Faroe Islands and Greenland in this table as a 1st level administrative districts within Denmark. Those are autonomous territories that, while belonging to the Danish realm, are not "part of" Denmark. --Bjarki (talk) 15:40, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Let's go ahead and correct this. Rarelibra (talk) 15:56, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * All three are now shown as top-level divisions of the Kingdom of Denmark. -- Beland (talk) 08:43, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Mexico
I didn't want to edit it myself since I was afraid I would mess up with the layout of it, so I rather discuss this first. Some municipalities in Mexico (less than 10) are further subdivided administratively into delegaciones (boroughs) as well (see: Boroughs of Mexico for further details), arguably making it a third-level administrative division. The great majority of the municipalities, however, simply use "auxiliary presidential councils" (presidencia auxiliar) with or without clearly prescribed limits. -- the D únadan 23:16, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * If there are further subdivisions, they can be listed and properly annotated. Rarelibra (talk) 15:38, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the pointer; I have updated the list accordingly. -- Beland (talk) 07:04, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Greece
270+ demoi(municipalities) are 3rd level administrative entities, based on the article, not 4th level, so when the maintenance is over I'm thinking of adding that as a note. Logictheo (talk) 09:18, 22 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Best I can tell, the levels are correct: Decentralized administrations of Greece, Regions of Greece, Regional units of Greece, Municipalities and communities of Greece. Some articles weren't counting the decentralized administrations, so I changed them. Corrections welcome. -- Beland (talk) 06:48, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

France
In this table the cantons are shown as the third level, while Cantons in France is listed in the fourth level category. This is because the regions are shown here in brackets with the departments the first level. Is this correct that the departments are 1st level? --Astrokey 44 00:40, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * The regions have limited administrative responsibility, and are mostly historic in reference. So yes, the departments are the 1st level. Rarelibra (talk) 15:38, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Is there any official listing of the departments as first level? If not, I think the departments on down should be moved to second level and so forth, with the regions as first level.   I'll do that myself in a couple of days if no one objects. Inkan1969 (talk) 23:29, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * i don't think the regions of france could be skipped as 1st-level subdivisions. they do hold that status in france, being the departments the 2nd-level one. at least iso (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_3166-2:FR) recognises both levels. your american FIPS codes as well (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_FIPS_region_codes_(D%E2%80%93F)#FR:_France) and the same for the EU nuts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NUTS_of_France). anyway, let's wait for more opinions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sacdegemecs (talk • contribs) 15:51, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Template:Administrative divisions of France lists the order: Regions, Departments, Arrondissements, and Cantons. The table and categories follow that order now, and that seems correct as far as I can tell. -- Beland (talk) 06:56, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Western Sahara case
Western Sahara is actually administrated by Morocco (resolution S/2001/398 of 24 April 2001) but the UN statute of this region is non self-governing territory. If you consider the administrative power of Morocco in the region, you need to keep the changement I made but if you consider it as a non self-governing territory, you need to delete it from this list as Western Sahara isn't a sovereign country.--Moroccansahraoui (talk) 14:39, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * The administrative divisions in that row actually refer to the SADR, so I changed the name and kept the SADR flag. I added a note saying those divisions are notional, as Morocco administers most of the disputed territory, and the way Morocco divides up Western Sahara is described in the Morocco row. -- Beland (talk) 01:43, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Canada?
Why are the provinces of Canada given individual listings? No other country's first rank subdivisions are given such a listing, except for the UK's four constituent countries. What makes Canada's subdivisions so special? Inkan1969 (talk) 21:25, 12 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Nothing much, really. It may be that the person that added this info was considering the differences between the subdivisions in each province; at the third tier, New Brunswick has parishes, whereas Ontario has regional municipalities, and Alberta has summer villages (for example). At the second tier, there is still some variation between them, but this may not be of relevance here. Mind  matrix  15:59, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

The Netherlands
Why is the Netherlands divided in 12 provinces, Aruba and the Netherlands Antilles on the first level? I think this should be changed, one way or the other. The Kingdom of the Netherlands consists of three countries, i.e. The Netherlands, Aruba and the Netherlands Antilles. In this table, The Kingdom as a whole and the country are not separated from each other. One solution could be to list all the three countries separately, like the British overseas dependencies. Another solution could be to rename the country in the list to 'Kingdom of the Netherlands' and put the three countries 'Aruba', 'The Netherlands' and 'the Netherlands Antilles' in the first level of administrative divisions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wgeelhoed (talk • contribs) 12:13, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * This has been done, and then updated after the Netherlands Antilles dissolved in 2010. -- Beland (talk) 07:18, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Western Sahara Flag
There is no flag associated to Western Sahara. That was agreed on Wikipedia. See other pages reached from list of countries.--Moroccansahraoui (talk) 15:10, 4 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Changed to SADR; see . -- Beland (talk) 09:03, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

British overseas territories and crown dependencies
Ok, I understood why the provinces of Canada are given individual listings (each has different subdivisions). But I don't see why the British overseas territories and crown dependencies are given speciall treatment. The explanation on the article - "Where these have administrative divisions, they are listed as if separate countries" - are usable for most of other countries' dependent territories.

As placing them under the United Kingdon would be a major change on the article, I would like to know if anybody has a reason against doing it. Thanks and regards. Gvogas (talk) 23:22, 4 July 2010 (UTC)


 * These have since been moved to under the UK and the "separate countries" note is gone. -- Beland (talk) 09:04, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Listing First Divisions
I was thinking it might be an idea to have a list of all of the first-level divisions for each country. I'd be happy to add this myself, but I don't want to cause an upset if the consensus is to just keep numeric values. Xtremerandomness (talk) 10:27, 5 November 2010 (UTC)


 * That would probably make the table too long to be manageable. -- Beland (talk) 00:07, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Poland
Please use these informations from Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_divisions_of_Poland): The administrative division of Poland since 1999 has been based on three levels of subdivision. The territory of Poland is divided into voivodeships (provinces); these are further divided into powiats (counties), and these in turn are divided into gminas (communes or municipalities). Major cities normally have the status of both gmina and powiat. Poland currently has 16 voivodeships, 379 powiats (including 65 cities with powiat status), and 2,478 gminas. Many thanks in advance ( User Brunoma from Cracow, Poland) 0:29, 4 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.49.38.241 (talk)
 * I've cleaned up Poland in the table; it has more detail than the above but needs some citation for the lowest level. -- Beland (talk) 08:01, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Russian Federation
what about the federal districts of the russian federation? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_districts_of_Russia) they are not mentioned here and they look for sure like an upper-level subdivision — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sacdegemecs (talk • contribs) 09:21, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
 * They are not administrative subdivisions and not mentioned in the Constitution.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:36, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Correction: Turkey
Turkey has only two levels of administrative divisions. 81 il and 900+ ilçe are the only ones.

The rest mentioned in the table, namely belediye, neighborhood and villages have no administrative power at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.234.231.143 (talk) 20:09, 24 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Based on the articles linked in the table, it appears that towns, villages, and neighborhoods have elected administrators, so it seems like they should count as administrative divisions. -- Beland (talk) 00:37, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

London (First tier)
The highest level subdivisions of England are the nine regions. The London region, known as Greater London has a devolved assembly and a directly elected Executive. In addition it is a First-level NUTS of the European Union. 86.129.235.151 (talk) 12:59, 29 May 2015 (UTC)


 * I've redone England to fix this and other issues. -- Beland (talk) 00:07, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Moscow
Administrative okrugs of Moscow are divided into districts and settlements. VanyaTihonov (talk) 17:09, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Added, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:12, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Absence of divisions
There are redlink entries for divisions of various states and related entries when on the several pages for those places it is stated that there are no internal subdivisions - examples would be Aruba and Vatican. A 'no subdivisions' indicator is necessary. Jackiespeel (talk) 16:55, 12 September 2017 (UTC)


 * I don't see any red links for those two entities, so I'm not sure what you are referring to. But feel free to add a note where you think it is necessary. --Lasunncty (talk) 23:50, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
 * So where should 'no administrative divisions' be put (especially as tables are easy to 'dislocate')? Jackiespeel (talk) 16:24, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I added notes to the cells where the top-level administrative divisions would otherwise be given. -- Beland (talk) 20:05, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

UK | England counties
There is an article listing both Metropolitan and Non-Metropolitan counties of England. I think it would be useful to link to it. If you are agree, can someone please add link to it. I also do not know how to format tables — it should somehow unite all second-level subdivisions of England.

The article: | Metropolitan and non-metropolitan counties of England — Preceding unsigned comment added by Efojs (talk • contribs) 22:10, 26 February 2018 (UTC)


 * That article is being merged into Counties of England. Counties in general are often no longer governing authorities, so trying to link to that would not fit into the table very well. I have linked "England" to Subdivisions of England instead, which does link to the suggested article. -- Beland (talk) 00:24, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:55, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Bandera de la Provincia Distrito Nacional.png

Type of state
This will improve the table as first level of adminsration doesn't mean the same in Unitary states vs Federal state or regional states. DoctorHver (talk) 06:12, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Format
Why do some countries have their first-level divisions listed out (e.g. Australia, Canada), while most do not? Is there a reason for this? Natg 19 (talk) 22:31, 6 January 2023 (UTC)


 * I believe this is because they are further subdivided differently from each other, i.e. there is not a uniform method of second-level division (or third-, etc) throughout the country. --Lasunncty (talk) 02:06, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorting
Sorting this table results in a jumbled mess. Is there any reason to keep this functionality? --Lasunncty (talk) 09:51, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree the result is a mess. I think "sortable" should be removed from the table. DRMcCreedy (talk) 16:15, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Done. -- Beland (talk) 00:03, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Flags
There is enough width pressure on the country name column that (on my monitor, at least) in some rows, country names are getting wrapped to be a separate line from their flags. This looks weird. I've also read advice from professional graphic designers like Stephen Few who would say they are at best wasting precious space and at worst colorful distractions that make the actual information in the table harder to read. Anyone who needs to know what the flags look like is better served by Gallery of sovereign state flags. I propose dropping the flags and just using country names. -- Beland (talk) 09:10, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Done. -- Beland (talk) 16:57, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Belize
Can the link go to Districts of Belize rather than Belize itself. Jackiespeel (talk) 16:14, 10 July 2017 (UTC)


 * This has since been done. -- Beland (talk) 00:50, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Pakistan
The "2 autonomous territories" listing under Pakistan should be deleted. Those two territories (Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan) are controlled by Pakistan but do not form part of that country. According to Pakistan's current constitution, Pakistan consists only of four provinces and one capital territory. The administrative map of Pakistan that was published by the CIA in 2020 contains the following statement: "Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan are not constitutionally part of Pakistan." Atelerixia (talk) 22:47, 30 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Most sources treat them as part of Pakistan. CMD (talk) 01:20, 31 March 2023 (UTC)