![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
For the May 2005 deletion debate on this article, see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Assumption by Russia of the Soviet Union's seat in the United Nations.
Idle curiosity. Which one didn't? Russia itself, or one of the others? Ah.
Georgia, right?
–Hajor
00:21, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
If Northern Ireland were to break away from the United Kingdom, so that it changed from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the United Kingdom of Great Britain, would that create the same kind of legal dispute over the UK's seat? Nik42 22:31, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
if some should be questioned than its these both countries, or they should give up their seat for a EU one-- Karesu12340 ( talk) 18:35, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 ( talk) 00:07, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
In search to improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page.-- J. D. Redding 21:44, 4 August 2013 (UTC) [ps., ... and remove the tophat]
Experts? Any around?-- J. D. Redding 21:44, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Please bullet list points of original research.-- J. D. Redding 21:44, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Please list what is non-encyclopedic description of the subject. -- J. D. Redding 21:44, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 3 external links on
Russia and the United Nations. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 06:32, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
I'm not an expert on wiki etiquette so I haven't made any changes yet but I'm sceptical that Andrew McLeod should be used as a source. If you look at his website it's pretty clear the man is a grifter and a chancer who massively oversells his own expertise, he's only a visiting professor at kings with no specialist knowledge of constitutional or international law, and he's controversial for making up nonsense facts. 2001:4646:4DE6:0:4C09:DA34:B645:F3DE ( talk) 12:42, 2 February 2024 (UTC)