Institutions of the European Union has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||
|
A summary of this article appears in European Union. |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
I'm proposing to merge in the institution section of European Union law. I'm really not sure why the European Union law should have an institutions section at all, so I'm proposing to move in any useful information into this article and then delete the section from the European Union law article. Caveat lector 01:21, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
I know the sentence about the Court of Auditors looked a bit out of place in the main paragraph on governance, but the reason I moved it out it out of the legal system section was that, despite its name, isn't a law court and has almost nothing in common with either the Court of Justice or the Court of First Instance. I just feel that putting all of these courts together gives a misleading impression of the functions of these bodies which can only add to the confusion already created by the name of the Court of Auditors. Caveat lector 16:50, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
It is a judical body though. It may not deal with law but it is does not lie within the executive or legislative branches hence it would be misleading to place it with those. I reckon it makes more sence for judical bodies to me mentioned together, their overall role within the government is the same even if they are dealing with different elements. - J Logan t: 17:16, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
For the case in point there is no separation of powers in the community. Both the Commission and the Council exercise both legislative and executive powers. Caveat lector 23:53, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello, I am the GA reviewer of this article. If you have any questions regarding this GA review or GA reviews(of me) in general, do not hesitate to ask them. Regards, Daimanta 11:19, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
"Once a position is agreed, it has to be approved by Parliament again by an absolute majority"
wikilink "absolute maojority" , Daimanta 13:29, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
In the background section I am kind of missing why the coal and steel union was formed. Can somebody insert a short reason why it was formed? Daimanta 17:49, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
The thing about this article is that I am missing the "why" of this article. This article lists all the institutions but not when or why they were formed. This needs to be elaborated. Regards, Daimanta 12:12, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I think the article is GA worthy. I will wait 5 hours for any comments. After that I will grant it GA. Regards, Daimanta 10:58, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
Ok, the article has passed. I would like to thank the authors of this article for making this a GA and Caveat Lector and JLogan for completing my requests. Regards, Daimanta 17:55, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
There is a section dealing with similarities between EU institutions and Swiss government. I think there are also many similarities to German system of government. For example, the role of the Council is similar to German Bundesrat and the system of exclusive competence and shared competence between member states and the EU is similar to competences between federal and Länder level in Germany. The Bundesrat has annually rotating presidency and it's composed of representatives of the Land governments, etc. Should somebody write something about this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.195.99.38 (talk) 22:23, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
I have been perhaps to quick to revert an anon's inclusion of Mr Kelemen's book. I did it because the phrase "EU laws are more detailed when compared with member states laws", seemed rather strange to me as EU directives are generally less detailed when compared to the national law which implement them. I do not have access to the book but I have looked at this article by the same author. I gather that his core theory is actually not that EU laws are more detailed, as such, but rather that there are more of them and disputes which in the past would have been with on a "man to man" basis would now end up in the courts. Or in other words, in the past the relevant government minister would have called in the industry chiefs for a "chat" but now governments have less scope to sort out ad hoc solutions and disputes over complicated EU rules are likely to end to in the courts.
The rules are detailed but this isn't his main point. In any case, this isn't about comparing federal or confederal structures, the subject of the rest of the paragraph, but about the normative consequences of EU rules. I'm not sure where this belongs in Wikipedia, but it doesn't belong here.
In any case, I don't think making a statement and footnoting a whole book qualifies with citing sources. Please give page numbers.
Please free to report this to an admin, if you want. Blue-Haired Lawyer 00:48, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
I am wondering to what extent the comparison with Germany etc. is relevant to an article on "Institutions of the European Union" (as opposed to the constitution of the EU, for instance).
The newly added section comparing the EU with the USA looks like original research, in that there are no citations mentioning a comparison between the two entities. I am not even sure what the purpose of the USA column is.--Boson (talk) 20:44, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
This statement in the lede follows a list of seven institutions. Am I not getting something or is this just rubbish? Tomeasy T C 07:35, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
I propose we clearly state at each subsection where that institution is located:
European parliament.
Location:Brussels.
description....
Do you agree?--CoincidentalBystander (talk) 15:03, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
An image used in this article, File:European Parliament Distance modified.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests March 2012
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:European Parliament Distance modified.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:27, 7 March 2012 (UTC) |
I think the template is really helpful in this article. Of course the body text is important, too, but this table gives a first overview. — Allrounder (talk) 14:28, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello!
In the part European institutions Luxemburg is written. Shouldn't it be Luxembourg instead?
Greetings! --Cleverle (talk) 20:01, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
the image has no source of the information in it depicted. in source it simply says: own work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.247.245.239 (talk) 14:09, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
>> Fostering a European identity is unlikely to be a successful method for increasing citizens’ trust in the EU(Lihaas (talk) 15:56, 11 February 2014 (UTC)).
This article transcludes the template ((EU institutions)). This seems to be used only in two places and results in text and images being duplicated. Would it be more sensible to remove the template and merge non-duplicated material into the running text where appropriate? --Boson (talk) 15:30, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
This article seems to be cluttered with images. Firstly there is the template problem mentioned above, which means that many images are duplicated. Even without that duplication, there are several pictures of parliamentary chambers that don't really add much? Do we really need pictures of so many non-EU legislative chambers, all looking rather similar. And do we need pictures of so many empty conference rooms, whatever the purpose of those rooms. Also, some of the images don't have captions. Shouldn't we remove several of the images, and then think about captions? --Boson (talk) 15:30, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Just below the summary box, on the right of the article, there are two diagrams which seem to do the same job and one of which is not an SVG. Should we remove the non-SVG diagram (it's in French as well!)? Ads20000 (talk) 10:42, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Institutions of the European Union. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check))
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:37, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Institutions of the European Union. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check))
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:50, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
In the Establishment and Changes section, we have “In 1957 the Treaties of Rome established two similar communities, creating a common market (European Economic Community) and promoting atomic energy co-operation (Euratom). The three institutions .... “ Similar to what? The reader is left to wonder. Which three? The reader is left to wonder. Boscaswell talk 23:01, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
The titles Council of the European Union and European Council are only distinguished by the difference between the word Union in the first reference and its absence in the second. It is possible that the more precise grammar of other languages does distinguish between the two but not in English where Council of the European Union is included, in the absence of a clear exception, in the title European Council. It is obviously unclear since the article on the European Council states explicitly that the European Council is a body of the European Union.
Currently the article recognises the possibility of confusion e.g. (Not to be confused with Council of the European Union or Council of Europe.) but does nothing to remove the confusion. I suggest someone with an intimate knowledge of these bodies resolve this matter. That such confusion should exist in an encyclopedia is highly undesirable.
Currently I make no observation on the similarity between Council of Europe and European Council. Is there a difference?--Damorbel (talk) 09:42, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
Candy 2603:7000:CC00:59DC:3CFE:7FB3:F46:F720 (talk) 02:03, 22 November 2022 (UTC)