File talk:Same-sex marriage map Europe detailed.svg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Notice Primary discussion for this map takes place at its file talk page on English Wikipedia:
File talk:Same sex marriage map Europe detailed.svg

Poland[edit]

why Poland is not in light blue like San Marino when there is also there unregistered cohabitation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BernardaAlba (talk • contribs) 17:28, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Greece[edit]

Should be updated, Greece regognises foreign same-sex marriages for domestic purposes. --46.103.236.115 11:24, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ukraine, Balarus, Moldova, Armenia[edit]

In the Russian parent law traditionally the definition of marriage is not described. Ukraine, Balarus, Moldova, Armenia have no concept of marriage in their constitutions. Armenia does not recognize foreign marriages. Please correct --Терпр (talk) 19:46, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

UPD. Serbia, Montenegro and Lithuania do not contain a definition of marriage in the constitution too. Estonia do not recognize same-sex marriages registered abroad --Терпр (talk) 13:28, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ukraine, Balarus, Moldova, Lithuania, Armenia, Serbia, Montenegro do not contain a definition of marriage in the Constitution. Although in their constitutions there is a reference that the marriage "is based on the voluntary consent of the man and the woman". This wording is the subject of a dispute between lawyers. A number of lawyers believe that this allows one to recognize same-sex marriages --Терпр (talk) 13:33, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop vandalizing, Терпр. There are sources about Estonia and Armenia recognizing marriages performed abroad. --80.104.57.104 13:56, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
en:Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources? Bring me these sources. --Терпр (talk) 18:05, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
https://news.err.ee/120456/nonprofit-court-orders-entry-of-same-sex-marriage-into-estonian-register --Baronedimare (talk) 19:30, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Circuit court: Same-sex marriage cannot be considered valid in Estonia --Терпр (talk) 10:13, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Терпр, the 2nd does not nullify the first. According to the account you provided, the women's marriage was not legit because they did not establish residency in the US. That has nothing to do with the validity of the Swedish marriage.

I find it frustrating that there is so little coverage of these countries. But you need to present actual evidence for your arguments.

I mean, take your statement "The news about Armenia is a fake, which appeared because of the information war of Armenia and Azerbaijan". Do you actually have a source for that, or is it just bullshit that you think will bolster your argument without you having to do the work of digging up the evidence? I can't tell. Kwamikagami (talk) 18:24, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No. Contradictions of judges is an unfinished problem. If such a decision was taken by the Supreme Court, then it would be possible to draw a map in green. Otherwise, now even the map of Russia can be painted in green. In Russia, several dozen recognized same-sex couples.
Argue with you is meaningless. Unfortunately, I you these files for Russian Wikipedia. At the moment, the article "Same-sex Marriages" is preparing to be nominated for "Good Articles". And you ruin it. I wish you the same zeal to bring the article "Same-Sex Marriage" to the status of "Good Article" in English Wikipedia --Терпр (talk) 01:20, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
To argue, you have to actually present an argument. I argued myself once that Armenia and Estonia should be removed from the map. So, present your evidence. I'm not opposed to the changed if you can substantiate them. If you're incapable of doing that, then you're correct -- your argument is meaningless. Kwamikagami (talk) 00:32, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Poland correction needed![edit]

The court confirmed that the constitution is not an obstacle to recognising same-sex marriage [1][2][3][4]--213.205.242.239 20:26, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No it was not needed as lower court does not have power to decide on constitutional interpretation. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 31.182.159.114 (talk) 09:47, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Estonia[edit]

Court confirms lack of marriage rights. Story here. Kwamikagami (talk) 04:16, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. For instance, the EU court decision from last year does not mean that same-sex marriage is recognized all over the EU. It just means that married same-sex couples have the same rights as other married couples when subject to Union law. --Glentamara (talk) 08:23, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

domestic vs external minimal rights?[edit]

Should we distinguish countries like Poland and maybe Slovakia, who accord domestic couples minimal rights (cohabitation etc.) from countries like Lithuania and Romania that only grant residency to foreign spouses under EU law, and we do on the world SSM map? Kwamikagami (talk) 01:05, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Implemented. Narrowed red stripes per Ratherous to make distinctions more visible.

Sharia and constitutional bans[edit]

Since my attempt to limit the map to Europe (per request on WP-en) was reverted, I've colored sharia states red. A constitutional implementation of islamic law constitutes a ban on SSM. All Arab states on the map have sharia at least for family law, except for Tunisia and Algeria. But the Algerian constitution states that islamic morals may not be violated. In Jordan, Lebanon and Israel, islamic law applies only to muslims, so I striped them, though it's possible there may be other constitutional bans on marriage that would apply to everyone (as in Algeria, or 'man and woman' wording, etc.) Kwamikagami (talk) 00:25, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think non-european countries should not appear at all, just like it has been done in other similar maps. Either like they did on File:Parejas del mismo sexo en la UE.svg or like they did on File:Asia homosexuality laws.svg--Baronedimare (talk) 10:09, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Rather than debating whether Saudi Arabia and Iran have made exceptions to Islamic law to allow SSM, even while enforcing the death penalty, it's easier to simply limit the map on Europe to Europe. Kwamikagami (talk) 05:42, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kazakhstan[edit]

Kazakhstan is a transcontinental country in Europe and Asia. While I do not wish to enter into a debate over whether non-European countries should be on this map (I wouldn't be fully opposed to having said countries on the map, though technically their outlines are still on the map, just very whited out), if we are only showing European countries, Kazakhstan should be visible on the map. Note that Kazakhstan is included as European on the Europe and LGBT rights in Europe pages in Wikipedia. Can someone please add Kazakhstan?

Thanks! -TenorTwelve (talk) 11:19, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Armenian-occupied territories surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh[edit]

The map is outdated and misleading.

Azerbaijan retained the areas of Nagorno-Karabakh that it captured during the war, all Armenian-occupied territories surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh ceded back to Azerbaijan by 1 December 2020.

Armenian-occupied territories surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh and the southern part of the self-proclaimed Republic of Artsakh should be colored gray.

The Nagorno-Karabakh region is an internationally recognized integral part of the Republic of Azerbaijan. Three UN Security Council resolutions and two UN General Assembly resolutions refer to Karabakh as being part of Azerbaijan. The Armenian forces have withdrawn from Armenian-occupied territories surrounding Karabakh by 1 December 2020.

It's been nine months since the war ended, and this map still continues to deny the facts and deliberately mislead the public. Why?

Wikipedia should respect the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan. The map should reflect the reality. I would've edited the map myself, but I don't know how to do this. Please update the map. Biased armenophile (talk) 18:13, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why? Because no-one's bothered, not because there's some nationalist conspiracy.
Artsakh still exists. Someone established that SSM is unconstitutional there. Do we know this to be either true or false?
Kwamikagami (talk) 21:43, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Kwamikagami: no one is saying that Artsakh no longer exists. But the self-proclaimed state had lost a part of its territory. Under the new deal, the status quo is completely transformed. Firstly, Azerbaijan regains control of all seven districts around Nagorno-Karabakh. This includes districts that had already been captured by Azerbaijan during the conflict and three districts held by Armenia at the time of ceasefire – Lachin, Kalbajar and Agdam. Armenia returned the Kalbajar district to Azerbaijan on 25 November 2020 and the Agdam district on 20 November 2020. The Lachin district was handed over to Azerbaijan on 1 December 2020.

Secondly, Azerbaijan now also controls southern parts of Nagorno-Karabakh itself, including the strategically important city of Shusha.

After the handover of those surrounding districts to Azerbaijan, Nagorno-Karabakh is essentially cut off from Armenia, save for the Lachin corridor. Under the deal, this is a 5 km-wide corridor under the control of Russian peacekeepers connecting Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh (through the Lachin district which is now under Azerbaijan’s control).

Now that means that red area reduced and grey area increased.

I'm not saying we should totally erase Artsakh from the map. No, we should just reflect the new borders, reduce red area and increase grey area. Biased armenophile (talk) 08:28, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

But do we have evidence that SSM is unconstitutional in Artsax? If it's not, then we don't need to worry about the border, just leave it grey. If it is, then I'd need to find this same map with the old Karabagh border. I probably wouldn't try adjusting it to current circumstance, as who knows when it will change again. Kwamikagami (talk) 08:42, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Kwamikagami: Yes, we have evidence for that.

Source: http://nkr.am/en/constitution/9/

The source is from "LGBT rights in Asia".

"I probably wouldn't try adjusting it to current circumstance, as who knows when it will change again."

It won't change any time soon. The 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh ceasefire agreement was signed on 9 November by the President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev, the Prime Minister of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan and the President of Russia Vladimir Putin. It's a settled matter. I mean it's done, at least for 10 years. Biased armenophile (talk) 09:12, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Kwamikagami:

Sample map 1: https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Azerbaijan_with_Nagorno_Karabakh_region.svg#mw-jump-to-license

Sample map 2: https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Limited_recognition.png#mw-jump-to-license

Sample map 3: https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Caucasus_regions_map2.svg#mw-jump-to-license Biased armenophile (talk) 11:45, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. For accuracy, it would be best if the map of Europe this was based on has been updated. Or, if we only have the old boundaries, it would be better to start with that. The ones you linked to are maybe a bit amateurish? Though at the small resolution of this map, that probably doesn't matter much. Anyway, I'll try ID'ing the base map tomorrow, but if I forget, please ping me again. Kwamikagami (talk) 11:50, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The 3rd map was good. I used that. Kwamikagami (talk) 01:49, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Kwamikagami:

I think that looks brilliant. Beautiful job, thank you so much! Biased armenophile (talk) 06:14, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Kwamikagami:

Hey, I think the time has come to finish the job. These three maps need to be updated:

1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:World_laws_pertaining_to_homosexual_relationships_and_expression#/media/File%3AWorld_laws_pertaining_to_homosexual_relationships_and_expression.svg

2. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6d/Asia_homosexuality_laws.svg

3. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/25/Same-sex_marriage_map_Europe_detailed.svg

Armenia needs a dark purple question mark. Biased armenophile (talk) 19:46, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm out of town this week, may or may not be able to get to it before I get back. Kwamikagami (talk) 19:48, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Kwamikagami: What happened with Armenia and self-proclaimed Artsakh? Despite the consensus reached, someone changed the map. Can you please change it back? Biased armenophile (talk) 16:22, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Incomplete update from 14 November 2021[edit]

Countries like Hungary, Montenegro and Croatia with civil unions for same-sex couples now missing in map. Also missing are countries like Bulgaria, Slowakia, Lattiva and Lithuania. Update is from a Russian user and so maybe a troll updated map. --92.72.100.159 15:45, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Poland, again - it should technically be red[edit]

If red codes for "Constitution restricts marriage to opposite-sex couples", then Poland should be red, as per: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recognition_of_same-sex_unions_in_Poland:

On 11 May 2005, the Constitutional Tribunal ruled that: The Polish Constitution specifies marriage as a union of exclusively of a woman and a man. Thus, a contrario, it does not allow same-sex relationships. [...]

The Supreme Administrative Court of Poland 2018, ruling on the recognition of foreign same-sex marriages, ruled that "Article 18 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, which defines marriage as a union of a man and a woman, [...] requires to treat only a heterosexual union as a marriage in Poland [...]

etc..

Please @Zezen me with comments or updates, if any.


Zezen (talk) 08:27, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Update: enwiki colleagues think so as well, although their comments are somewhat dated:
Poland should be red. Article 18 of the constitution define mariage as a union between a man and a woman. Ron 1987 (talk) 14:07, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply] That is true, Poland needs to be coloured red. That color was lost when the yellowing was inserted. Hekerui (talk) 18:52, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply][reply]
Zezen (talk) 10:55, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Armenia and Artsakh Constitutions[edit]

The article 35 of the Constitution of Armenia, about the freedom to marry, states that "women and men of marriageable age have the right to marry and to found a family of their own free will". The same is stated in the Constitution of Artsakh, as it is mostly a copy of Armenia's.

It is not sure that this definition do restrict marriage to opposite-sex couples. It gives rights to both men and women, but does not require marriage to be between them.

A very similar case can be found in the Constitution of Spain, where article 32 states that "men and women have the right to marry with full legal equality". The Constitutional Court of Spain ruled that this article could not be interpreted as a ban on marriage for same-sex couples.

Then, perhaps it should be considered to remove the red color of Armenia and Artsakh.

--DaddyCell (talk) 19:33, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Interpreting constitutions is a matter for the relevant structures of a particular country. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 05:37, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Precisely for this reason I think it is necessary to consider removing the red color, because it is interpreting something that has not been done by their institutions or courts.
--DaddyCell (talk) 18:26, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A majority of lawmakers on November 12 dismissed consideration of a draft law proposed by the opposition Prosperous Armenia Party (BHK), saying it was redundant given that the country's constitution already defines marriage as a union between "a woman and a man." All sources I can see on the matter say similar. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 01:00, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed those news and political proposals reveal that it is not that clear that same-sex marriage is banned by the Constitution. But if the majority of Parliament argues that it is, let's leave it that way until there are court cases.
--DaddyCell (talk) 11:12, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2022: Same-sex marriages in Slovenia[edit]

Same-sex marriages are allowed in Slovenia since July 8, 2022

--92.76.97.150 16:50, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

According to the rtvslo article , the constitutional court DID NOT legalize same sex marriage. Rather, it said that the constitution cannot be Ibterpreted to ban same sex couples from marriage or a similar instrument. The Slovenian parlament may still decide to go the Italian way, aka make a new legal instrument that is 99% equal to marriage but not marriage itself. Touyats (talk) 11:30, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Andorra missing[edit]

It seems an edit back in May 2020 accidentally deleted the dot for Andorra, it should be added back in. DelUsion23 (talk) 22:35, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is there. May be you need to refresh your page. Regards, tyk (talk) 07:23, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Same-sex marriage in Greece allowed by parliament on 15 Februar 2024[edit]

The Hellenic Parliament of Greece passed a bill allowing Same-sex marriages.

Greece should be coloured in dark blue. --92.76.96.107 22:04, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File_talk:Same-sex_marriage_map_Europe_detailed.svg&oldid=852116743"