Forum:Global and regional issues/Worldwide Calling Codes' Scheme

From OpenGeofiction
Jump to navigation Jump to search
ForumsGlobal and regional issues → Global and regional issues/Worldwide Calling Codes' Scheme


This is how phone codes looked like before Wiki 1.0 shutdown. I am certain about +1..+5, +6..+9 may've been misaligned.

This is my sketch of how I remember the calling codes' assignment listed on Wiki 1.0.

Some countries on OGF Data spreadsheet kept the old code while some other countries came up with the new one.

I do understand that keeping this thing standard for everyone will end up in a failure, but hey, it worked pretty well before Wiki 1.0 ceasing, so at least we can try.

OP: Sudo91 (talk) 21:05, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

I prefer this proposal over others. Many countries in West Uletha already have +2x(x) as their phone codes. -- Mie (talk) 08:19, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
I also think we should keep the old system. It's simple and intuitive so it's possible to work. Also there is no reason to change. --Rustem Pasha (talk) 09:42, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
I see nothing wrong with the original calling code setup. Might as well keep the old system but keep the tables and lists defaulting to numerical order to more obviously show what numbers are taken. --Ernestpkirby (talk) 19:45, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

This is the previous consensus:

Zone Area
0 unassigned
1 unassigned
2 West Uletha
3 East Uletha
4 Tarephia
5 Antarephia
6 Archanta
7 Pelanesia & Orano
8 Ereva
9 Kartumia

/wangi (talk) 14:02, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

We got rid of the telephone code system because various mappers in the community kept trying to impose their vision of a telephone code system upon the world instead of letting the community choose the codes organically, which created conflict. If we can do better this time, I think we'll be more successful at maintaining this list. The one condition I think we need to keep is the three-digit requirement so that there are enough codes to allocate around the world. Otherwise, we could do two-digit with shared codes between countries. Chazeltine (talk) 14:30, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Why not both? Everyone can choose whether to align their territory's code with this standard (which I think is what most follow already anyway, right?), and I would also second that we promote it a little more. And if a few mappers don't want to, that will create the very same mess that we observe with lots of international agreements in the real world. We could pose the slight restriction that such contries are only allowed three-digit codes or similar. I am actually quite surprised how orderly the real-world world map of telephone codes is; a few countries deviating and having weird three-digit, non-conforming codes would seem much more belivable to me :) Leowezy (talk) 15:52, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
It's a technical standard, which needs to be accurate in the real-world for international dialling to work, rather than a showboat political standard. If a country does it wrong, then nobody from a third country can phone them. But in OGF, it's really just about avoiding dupes. wikipedia:International direct dialing /wangi (talk) 16:47, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
Speaking of 3-digit and 2-digit codes, Wiki 1.0 page said that only 3-digit and 4-digit codes may be reserved and people followed that rule. FSA had a 2-digit code (was it +63?) and Suria had a 2-digit code +29 (back then it had 10 federal republic, assuming each republic would get a 3-digit code, like +292 for Lido Republic). I can't recall people reserving 2-digit codes, maybe apart from single discrepancies. // Sudo91 (talk) 17:59, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
The FSA's code according to the old wiki was +611. --TheMayor (talk) 18:11, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
Was there any good reason to discuss/change the "old" code system? I would also prefer to keep the old one with the digits given in the table above. For each zone, there should be groups of countries with the same second digit. And in each group, a few third digits should be left to allow additional countries in the future (if there is the need).--Mstr (talk) (talk) 18:17, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
Not sure what you're trying to point out - the map and table above agree, and match what was on the old wiki. The original posted map wasn't quite right - user misremembering - but that was fixed a few days before your comment. There is at least now a summary of the overarching scheme, which there wasn't before, post migration. /wangi (talk) 22:57, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

I have no objection to keeping the framework by continent that we had before. Sure, it's better not to reinvent it. That said, I think we need a two things more narrow than before: (1) All calling codes should be three digits on OGF. We don't need a fight over which countries are "prominent" enough to be absorbing ten possible numbers with a two-digit code. (2) Codes are taken on a first-come, first-served basis but are only official when added to the country relation. We can use calling_code=* on the country relation itself.

I just wanted to know what was the reason to discuss the above (=old) system. I like the tagging proposal.--Mstr (talk) (talk) 15:42, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Also, we should embrace regional cooperation with area numbering plans (e.g. the whole Gobras Peninsula before was +200). I would be okay granting two-digit numbers to areas of 10 or more territories that want to share together. NANP works with more than 400 million people and millions of non-geographic numbers. Perhaps the Lyc area or northern Archanta would be interested in something like this. If these countries are as culturally tied together as implied, it would make sense to have a closed dialing area with regional area codes, etc. — Alessa (talk) 23:35, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

I brought this idea up among my Lycene neighbors, while I personally like the idea it seemed like consensus was most in favor of us all just sticking with our individual 3 digit numbers. --Ernestpkirby (talk) 02:16, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
Hi, what about listing all countries in an "official" table with ones with their code already taken and those with no code ? We could see upfront which codes are already taken and which ones are available for example. What do you think about that suggestion ? Sweetykid (talk) 00:43, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
The problem is that no such list exists anymore, and even if we did revive the old list from the old wiki, it'd be grossly outdated. There are a few of us that have been using the extended infoboxes like {{infobox infrastructure}} as a means of posting it (e.g. Mauretia claims +248 there as it was even before). So, at this point, we are effectively starting over. I don't think that is a bad idea as long as people are patient and be willing to compromise if there is more than one with the same number. — Alessa (talk) 03:42, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
Calling Code Map by CaribbeanIslandMapper.

Thank you for making a thread for an issue which I brought up several weeks ago! My thoughts:

  • Seeing that the western continents aren't likely to ever be opened, and that many (me included) treat them as deleted, we should spread the numbers 1-9 on the existing continents.
  • Codes should be attached to territories/regions rather than countries and stay when there is territory turnover. Unlike TLDs, codes do not depend on a country's name and thus can stay no matter what happens as long as the borders remain unchanged. Reassignments should only occur when territories are merged. Some smaller territories should have 3-digit codes. Admin approval should be required for deviating from this scheme, for example former colonies having a three-digit code derived from their mother country's two-digit code which belongs to a different continent, and also in asking for a "free" two digit code when you have a three-digit code. Whenever a territory is split, the admins should determine whether the two new territories share their code or a new code is made for one or both of them. Reassignments of two-digit codes should only occur through swaps with the consent of both territory owners, unless one of the territories is unowned. I made a proposal that distributes the digits 1-9 counterclockwise.
    • +1: South Archantan Numbering Plan (equivalent of North American Numbering Plan - single digit code)
    • +2: North Archanta
    • +3: Southeast Uletha
    • +4: Northeast Uletha
    • +5: Central Uletha (can alternatively be restricted to just Suria as a single digit code)
    • +6: Northwest Uletha
    • +7: Southwest Uletha
    • +8: Tarephia
    • +9: Antarephia
  • We should determine which countries get two-digit codes based on population, importance and size. Less developed countries are less likely to have just two digits, as are recently independent ones.
  • Some countries can have more than one code for historical purposes, due to their extent (for example for distant colonies and dependencies), or due to annexations. For example, Lorantis is likely to maintain a separate calling code from the rest of the Demirhan Empire for the next years until it is slowly phased out (which would likely require completely reordering the Demirhan numbering plan as it did not account for Lorantis in the past, unless it has a lot of unassigned blocks), or, maintain it indefinitely.
  • My above proposal is just a rough draft. The borders can be changed, depending on population density. For example, I feel like I might be doing Tarephia and Antarephia injustice with only one digit per continent. On the other hand, it might be more reasonable to draw the border between +3 and +4 along the mountains dividing the German-speaking countries from the Asian ones, rather than through the Darcodian Sea. Also, Nordurland and UL19a could get single-digit codes at the expense of the rest of Uletha due to their sheer size - perhaps +4 and +6 respectively, dividing the rest of Uletha except for Suria between +3 and +7.

CaribbeanIslandMapper (talk) 18:55, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

It largely seems like consensus so far still favors the original continent numbering scheme with all continents. That said, I am open to the idea of the calling codes being pre-assigned by territory rather than selected by nation. --Ernestpkirby (talk) 02:16, 18 December 2023 (UTC)