Template talk:World trade

monetary union
Is monetary union left out of this series on purpose? It seems like it belongs to me, but I'm no expert. Ingrid 16:08, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I s'pose it might be because it sort of doesn't fit into the logical progression &mdash; groups of countries have existed who had a monetary union, but little more than that in terms of integration. &mdash; Nightst a  llion  (?) 18:34, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I guess I'm still missing something. Isn't it also true that groups of countries have existed with a trade bloc and little else. Similarly for a customs union or free trade area? I imagine that once you get to a common market, you're pretty well integrated. It would make more sense to me for the template to look like:
 * {| align=left border=0 width=200 cellpadding=2 cellspacing=0 class=toccolours style="margin-left:0.5em;"

! align=center style="background:#ccccff" | Trade Series
 * International trade
 * History of international trade
 * History of international trade
 * History of international trade
 * Trade bloc
 * Free trade area
 * Customs union
 * Trade creation
 * Trade diversion
 * Customs union
 * Trade creation
 * Trade diversion


 * Monetary union
 * Common market
 * Economic and monetary union
 * }
 * But as I said, I'm not an expert, so didn't want to make a change without checking. Ingrid 04:47, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Economic and monetary union
 * }
 * But as I said, I'm not an expert, so didn't want to make a change without checking. Ingrid 04:47, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
 * But as I said, I'm not an expert, so didn't want to make a change without checking. Ingrid 04:47, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
 * But as I said, I'm not an expert, so didn't want to make a change without checking. Ingrid 04:47, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
 * But as I said, I'm not an expert, so didn't want to make a change without checking. Ingrid 04:47, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Trade Templates
While working on current account, I decided to make a trade template. A search didn't turn this one up and because the trade article is so messy, I didn't see this one. It was only after I completed and added this template to the trade article did I notice the trade bloc one. I really think trade is a large enough topic to be deserving of several templates (a big one and some smaller specialized ones) but I'm not sure how best to break them up.

I reccomend we try to figure this out quickly because Wikipedia's trade-related articles are in poor shape; this seems like a good way to start working on them. -David Youngberg 18:45, 13 February 2007 (UTC) certified pharmacy technician


 * I know this is an old post but I hope we can revive the discussion. I think David is right, the questions of how to improve the templates is still relevant. A concrete first step would be to decide whether we really need a sidebar on "World Trade" and another template which shows at the bottom of an article and which says "International Trade". I think one of the two is redundant. I would suggest to remove the one called "World Trade" (the term is, anyhow, not well-chosen). It would be good if we could agree that sidebars on trade should be more specific than the bottom-page template. Hope someone reads this...Karl Magnus (talk) 14:14, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Fair trade
Seems that Fair trade should be an item on this template. Morphh  (talk) 02:55, 2 March 2007 (UTC)