Jump to content

Talk:BRICS/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Can't throw BRICS at PIGS

http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/09/201192292011236419.html Nor was Russia; Moscow, via Arkady Dvorkovich, President Dmitry Medvedev’s chief economic adviser, stated flat out the Europeans must come up with a clear strategy for rescuing the PIGS (Portugal, Ireland and Italy, Greece, Spain) before Moscow starts buying more eurozone bonds.

Sounds like a plan for inaction to me, but it's worth looking into after the BRICS meeting at the G20 next week. Hcobb (talk) 22:09, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

potential resource

Is Indonesia Bound for the BRICs? How Stalling Reform Could Hold Jakarta Back by Karen Brooks, November/December 2011 99.19.44.155 (talk) 14:05, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

References

The reference section is a bit of a mess, showing many links twice. I'd fix it myself but I don't really know how. nagualdesign (talk) 16:13, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Wrong concept

BRICS is not an international organization, cause it has no any juridical identity. BRICS, in the same way than BRIC, is just the name that a group of countries receives due the share of common characteristics.

I'm gonna correct this mistake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.219.44.179 (talk) 13:59, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

I edit also the mistake about the join of South Africa to the BRIC group. It is NOT any official or formal join, cause it is not a Organization. It just can be that South Africa is being considered as part of the reality that is describeb by the BRIC concept.

BRIC is just a concept for describing a group of countries that share a set of common characteristics, not a organization, not a institution, not a formal association.

So, therefore, South Africa cannot oficially join anything that officially doesn't exist. South Africa can be invited (as it was) to a meeting celebrated by the members that participates in this definition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.219.44.179 (talk) 14:09, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

It's quite obvious that you have not actually read this article or the BRIC article. BRICS is a real organisation that was founded as a response to the BRIC theory. Try doing some reading before adverising your ignorance to the world. Roger (talk) 17:17, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

With the possible exception of Russia

In the first paragraph it stated that "with the possible exception of Russia, the BRICS members are all developing or newly industrialized countries, but they are distinguished by their large, fast-growing economies". The source for that Russia is an exception is a link to the Russian MFA website that "Russia along with other developed countries reaffirmed the pledges to provide aid to developing countries". Grammatically, it doesn't state that Russia is not a developed country. For example, when a guy says: "me and the other guys will go to the restaurant", this doesn't mean that the speaker is not a guy. A.h. king • Talk to me! 18:39, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Exactly – the point is that the source considers Russia to be a developed country, whereas the other BRICS countries are unquestionably developing countries. – Michaelmas1957 (talk) 19:00, 16 March 2013 (UTC)


the $100 billion fund

there isn't anything about the fund, which is probably the first material step taken by the BRICS to showcase their importance in today's world. Something should be there.. http://in.reuters.com/article/2013/10/11/g20-brics-fund-idINL6N0I13N720131011

Does it actually exist yet?
If I had a dollar for every time a BRICS government announced about a big investment, I'd have enough cash to, um, make some big investments of my own. bobrayner (talk) 14:35, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

____________________________________________________

It should be created by March, according to Brazil's Finance Minister Guido Mantega...

http://in.reuters.com/article/2013/10/10/us-brazil-economy-mantega-idINBRE9990WR20131010 Rishab (talk) 10:34, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

GDP (PPP) calculations

Total of GDP(PPP) for BRICS does not equal the sum of the individual countries because the source includes more accurate numbers which are truncated in the infobox for space. The actual number from the source are (source):

Brazil 2,466.567
China 13,623.255
India 5,031.678
Russia 2,640.737
South Africa 608.804
Total 24371.041

I originally put 34371, but that was a typo. Thank you to 217.74.224.150 for catching that. EvergreenFir (talk) 03:25, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Nice work. bobrayner (talk) 12:23, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Statement of the Governor of the Russian Central Bank

In the Developments section, a statement of the Governor of the Russian Central Bank, Elvira Nabiullina, is reported in quotation marks: "BRICS partners the establishment of a system of multilateral swaps that will allow to transfer resources to one or another country, if needed"

However in the same phrase it is also quoted the conclusion of the article where this statement was extracted: "If the current trend continues, soon the dollar will be abandoned by most of the significant global economies and it will be kicked out of the global trade finance. Washington's bullying will make even former American allies choose the anti-dollar alliance instead of the existing dollar-based monetary system."

This is misleading because it leads the reader to think that the second quoted text is also part of the statement of the Governor though it is not.

--99.246.50.162 (talk) 05:34, 3 August 2014 (UTC) Luca

Criticism section

How is the statement "In 2012, Hu Jintao, who at the time was President of China, described the BRICS countries as defenders and promoters of developing countries and a force for world peace." a criticism? Shouldn't this be removed? Snow333 (talk) 14:55, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

You're right, it doesn't sound critical, but I don't think it should be removed from the article altogether. Instead, to promote non-POV, I renamed the section to "Reception". 129.67.156.156 (talk) 14:45, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Millions or Billions?

Foreign-exchange reserves of the BRICS members are presented in the table in form: $<value> bn So I understand it is in Billions of US$ => China's assets are:
3,899,285,000,000,000 US$
(or even to 3,899,285,000,000,000,000 US$, because we have the unfortunate dual short/wide scale meaning of word 'Billion', so I would NEVER use 'bn')
After checking on another wiki page I would say it is in fact
3,899,285,000,000 US$
In other words it is in Millions of US$. I know people do not usually care about actual values behind numbers like these when reading daily news, but I think it should be fixed here. I do not know how about the other columns, I was not interested in them...
In any case I propose to write units into the header row and do not to repeat them in each table column cell. Thanks.

Eltwarg (talk) 22:26, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Definition of 'Literacy'

It would be interesting to establish how the CIA determines the levels of literacy in the world.

To state that South Africans have a 93% literacy level is highly questionable. There may be a narrow age band of citizens who are 93% literate, but to claim 93% for the entire country is irresponsible and appears to be a thumb-suck.

197.88.26.53 (talk) 08:45, 14 July 2015 (UTC)Bruce Liddell

I don't is exactly falls into the scope of this article, but it is interesting nonetheless. There might be an article about it that we can link to. Aryamanaroratalk, contribs 20:54, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Describing Temer as president of Brazil

Rather than edit war on whether Temer should be described as president of Brazil, please contribute to Talk:President of Brazil#Should we replace Dilma Roussef with Michel Temer as the incumbent president? Yaris678 (talk) 14:36, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

bnjnjbh — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.214.117.119 (talk) 08:28, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on BRICS. 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).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:53, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on BRICS. 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).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:19, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Geography

Is the geography section really needed? It doesn't seem directly relevant to the article's subject. पदाति (talk) 12:29, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Expand the intro

The introduction section needs to be expanded with a few lines explaining what BRICS is and how it came to be established as a response to the Goldman Sachs BRIC thesis. A simple statement just saying it is an international organisation is inadequate. Roger (talk) 09:39, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

While I agree with you, the BRIC theory has been written about in the BRIC page and sufficient mention of the page can be seen in this page, so it should not be necessary. Rishab (Talk) 13:22, 19 January 2014(UTC)

Why are we not to confuse BRICS With BRIC but can do vice versa? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.105.95.101 (talk) 15:27, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

GDP and export

BRICS is collaborating to augment export and import to maximize GDP in high potential developing countries to broaden the local basket to include many quality items for household and food consumption. First world income BRICS will provide a new first world life based on daily life quality, food quality and solidarity! Central supply units will equally distribute final products to BRICS countries based on initial agricultural merit! 94.225.153.245 (talk) 13:58, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

GDP PPP entry for South Africa and Averages & Precision Comments

Minor edit: GDP PPP 2023 entry for South Africa was 990,030, which is in millions. Changed to billions. See List of countries by GDP PPP.

The Average entry in all columns are different from Total / 5. The GDP PPP average, for example, would be 10,234 instead of 8,119.9. Editing these entries may require further research into the original references. I have not done it.

Also, one should be aware of the excessive number of significant digits in some entries, which impacts clarity. For example, when listing values in hundreds of billions (using billion units), one should use integer numbers @ Llsouza (talk) 15:31, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

My edit of adding an map to show applicants and countries which has express their interest needs to look nicer

I made the map due to me wanting to visualize it and I am good with knowing where countries are and so it was easy for me especially since I already know how to us AI and inkscape but I am not sure how to marge it properly or the colors to really use. I just use blue since that was already in use. Perhaps it needs to be merged with the previous map but that is for current members only. Not sure to do. Mathsquare (talk) 03:08, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Chairman instead of President.

It would be accurate to call Mr. Xi Jinping Chairman instead of president because he is the chairman of the CCP as he leads the politburo in Beijing and there are no presidential elections in China. KamiSama502 (talk) 23:09, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

He actually has that title but it's means something else than what most people imagine. It's actually is a different position he hold. A better title would be general secretary since that is his highest rank and is de facto the highest rank in the country similar to all of the "Marxist-Leninist" "socialist" governments out there. In quotations since if you had ever study ML theory or economics systems then clearly they are all capitalists. Mathsquare (talk) 03:11, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

teal and cyan? really?

how are we supposed to distinguish the two without being an art major? food for thought Camdoodlebop (talk) 12:42, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Map still wrong

The United Arab Emirates aren't marked as Cyan while all the other new members are 176.230.45.215 (talk) 07:27, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 August 2023 (2)

Fix the map to include the United Arab Emirates as one of the new members (give it the light blue color)

Aammii (talk) 07:35, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

 Done M.Bitton (talk) 14:04, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 August 2023

Change the color scheme for the map please. I cannot understand this color scheme of teal, cyan and “light cyan” in the same map. Please apply contrasting color shades to signify different information, thanks. 74.135.2.33 (talk) 00:45, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

 Already done It appears the map in question has either been replaced or removed since this edit request was made. – Recoil16 (talk) 10:38, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 August 2023

Please change the following text:

it would be comprised by challengers to the Western-led international that "in the order the scale of GDP, now collectively outweigh not only the reigning hegemon, the United States, but the entire G-7 weight class put together."

To read as follows:

it would be comprised by challengers to the Western-led international order that "on the scale of GDP, now collectively outweigh not only the reigning hegemon, the United States, but the entire G-7 weight class put together."

The current quotation is not only ungrammatical and confusing (I did a double-take, trying to parse it as "in order to scale" or something), but it's also not the original quote, which can be verified by searching on Google or your favorite search engine. The original is the version with "on the scale". 98.170.164.88 (talk) 04:00, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

 Done — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 05:55, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

More countries are interested joining BRICS

According to web [1]https://www.silkroadbriefing.com/news/2022/11/09/the-new-candidate-countries-for-brics-expansion/, countries like Peru, Ecuador, Panama Costa Rica, Guatemala, Chile, Mongolia, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan are interested of joining BRICS. Alphaire (talk) 10:17, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Another Attack, From a Media Hack

The "challenge BRICS presents to the established world order seems destined to failure" and that the organisation's "realistic purpose has been to bolster China's bid for global domination". He went on to say that the "West has a unique opportunity to forge a new strategic alliance. India's real adversary is China, not the West, which makes an absurdity of its continued membership of BRICS. Far better to tempt India into the West's embrace...". Con Coughlin, defence and foreign affairs editor at The Daily Telegraph

Give such underhanded tactics - used against attempts to challenge the US world order - is it not more important that Wikipedia reports this event in a balanced and objective way? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.147.153.126 (talk) 20:58, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Mexico

I can't find a source that Mexico has applied (but I see a lot of internet buzz). I see Mexico was deleted a few days ago for this reason, but it is back today. what is going on? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fogonthedowns (talk • contribs) 02:45, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

This is right. Actually, the president of Mexico has confirmed Mexico is not interested. This map is misleading and this Wikipedia page has been hijacked to push an fake agenda 2A00:23C4:CE32:1401:E5D7:D23A:6388:5EAE (talk) 11:28, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
I will fix it. I got the source form the article. Mathsquare (talk) 04:04, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Im not sure if Uruguay and Bangladesh are added.

I only saw Argentina, Ethiopia, UAE,Egypt, Iran and Saudi Arabia. Khonziwe (talk) 14:40, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Come form the article for the map. Mathsquare (talk) 04:04, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Addition of Indonesia to the BRICS

The SVG maps for country members, applicants and potential members has Indonesia colored in "Applicant" candidate. It is proposed to include Indonesia in the BRICS#Countries that have applied for membership. There are quite ample references. 110.235.217.54 (talk) 09:10, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

Fixed Mathsquare (talk) 00:18, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

"Global South" expansion?

Just an observation, but taking Argentina out, the expansion becomes much more obviously about the middle east san Ethiopia, which is regionally adjacent. Think BRICS meets OPEC+ power dynamic. Doyna Yar (talk) 21:55, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Request to undo inaccurate info by OnManorama news in BRICS article

Hi, BRICS article admin,

Need your help to undo inaccurate info in BRICS article because the page is currently semi-protected.

Pakistan has not officially applied for BRICS membership, but only expressed interest. The report by India OnManorama news saying that Pakistan was blocked by India from joining BRICS is inaccurate.

Please help to undo the following edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=BRICS&diff=next&oldid=1172053130

The accurate info is listed under "Countries that have applied for membership" section. Thanks Thesidewalker11 (talk) 08:42, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

 Done it makes no sense to state that Pakistan was prevented from joining when it hasn't even applied for membership. M.Bitton (talk) 10:21, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

So I suppose the map now would need to be updated? - Adding Pakistan as an official applicant https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/11/24/pakistan-seeks-brics-membership-despite-india-roadblock — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.140.76.201 (talk) 09:26, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Map needs update

Hi, Argentina's Milei confirmed that Argentina will NOT join BRICS. Sources: (Source 1, in Spanish) (Source 2, in English) CoryGlee (talk) 09:18, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

The President has stated that he is not in favour of joining BRICS. It is the Congress of Argentina which has the final say. This is called democracy. 182.239.152.216 (talk) 04:24, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Argentina

Javier Milei has taken office. Why isn't the map updated when it has long been requested? 190.246.97.81 (talk) 22:12, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Updated to indicate what? Please expand on your request. (If you are hinting that the view of the President overrides the view of the Congress of Argentina, that remains to be seen; we will know on 1 January.) 182.239.152.216 (talk) 05:47, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
It is a bureaucratic delay to update the map, Argentina won't join. I hope the map is updated on Jan. 1. Cheers! --CoryGlee (talk) 11:52, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
You have heard an official announcement by the Government of Argentina? If so, source please. Not a politician making some claim in the press, an official government statement. The map at 28DEC23 depicts Argentina in dark blue, that being the colour of a member state - it should currently be light blue as an invitee state for 01JAN24. 182.239.148.125 (talk) 05:16, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
It's sourced under "Previous applicants" and one map has been updated. There will be plenty of sources as of Diana Mondino announcing that Argentina has rejected this invitation. Cheers! 190.246.97.81 (talk) 08:24, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
At the time of "the announcement" - i.e. a comment to a newspaper on 30NOV23 - she was not holding the position of FM, but as an economist expected to be appointed. That still does not make it an official statement by the Government of Argentina. We work on facts here - its an encyclopedia. 182.239.148.125 (talk) 03:00, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
Yup, facts. They will be available in a few days. Cheers! LoL. 190.246.97.81 (talk) 08:25, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
Hi again. Is this the source so much required to update the maps? (BBC News) 190.246.97.81 (talk) 17:24, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
I think so, it is a reliable source which indicates a formal letter has been received. Due process is important. Unclear why you would need to "LoL", apart from lack of respect for another point of view. 182.239.148.125 (talk) 04:47, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Can we at least fake impartiality?

BRICS has received both praise and criticism from numerous commentators.

Can we raise above the MSM media where everything they don't like is "controversial"? EU and NATO also have their critics (not only outsiders, but also from member states). Why don't we add to their wiki pages this kind of remarks? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.26.255.6 (talk) 03:35, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Carbon Foot Print

Another impressive statistic alongside population, landmass and GDP, is the share of Fossil Co2 emmissions of the world. The Current BRICS member countries are responsible for 51.78% of the total Fossil CO2 emissions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.119.156.170 (talk) 13:17, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 January 2024

Change "Founder member states' initials (in English)" To "Founder member state's and South Africa's initials (in English), since South Africa isn't a founding member 83.105.0.108 (talk) 23:04, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

I meant states' not state's 83.105.0.108 (talk) 23:05, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
But it is. Before "BRICS" it was just an informal discussion group. It became semi-formal already with SA included. 83.240.62.42 (talk) 10:08, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

head of BRICS development bank?

India will be the first Head of BRICKS development Bank represented by the leadership of Mr. Kamath — Preceding unsigned comment added by username or IP (talk • contribs) date (UTC)

Greece "interested" in membership?

So let's get this straight - of the links provided, one is a dead link, and one links to an article that is Russia inviting a debt-ridden Greece to join BRICS. Not only does the article not contain any text to support the assertion that Greece is "interested" in joining, as we all know Athens has since come out saying it is *not* interested in interacting with BRICS and the NDB. Can we get a consensus on removing the mention of Greece as an interested party? — Preceding unsigned comment added by username or IP (talk • contribs) date (UTC)

Leaders

I noticed that Mohammed bin Salman isn't listed in the leaders section. Is this intentional? SirShaunIV (talk) 23:31, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Isn't Saudi Arabia now a member of BRICS? First section of the article, it's not there. Here are sources for Saudi being a member:

https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2024/01/29/brics-expanded-so-what-next/

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/saudi-state-tv-says-kingdom-officially-begins-membership-brics-bloc-2024-01-02/ 75.221.95.36 (talk) 04:18, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

I made and maintain the map.

If there is a country that shouldn't belong on the map of brics expansion then please let me know and I will fix it. I got the information form the BRICs article. Mathsquare (talk) 04:08, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Protect the map. There are a lot of anti BRICS people trying to remove the map.
138.75.6.0 (talk) 15:20, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
Ok, I will do exactly that!!! Mathsquare (talk) 17:42, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
The whole article, not JUST the map, needs updated. The prime minister of South Africa just announced that Saudi Arabia has now officially joined BRICS (BRICS+). It's in the news from authoritative news agencies around the world on January 31/2024 and February 1/2024. See Reuters, BBC, you name it, they are all announcing this. Please update. 64.185.61.127 (talk) 14:04, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
Sorry, it's the South African foreign minister who said Saudi Arabia has now officially joined BRICS. 12.233.244.107 (talk) 14:15, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 February 2024

There are 5 new countries instead of the mentioned 4, Saudi Arabia also joined BRICS along with Ethiopia, Iran, the UAE and Egypt. 174.138.221.139 (talk) 00:40, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

For anything about the BRICS expansion map

Please put it here and so I can easily see it. I am the author and maintainer of the map.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File_talk:Map_of_BRICS_members_and_other_countries_which_are_either_joining,_had_applied_to_join,_or_had_expressed_an_interest_in_joining_BRICS.svg Mathsquare (talk) 00:19, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

The foreign minister of South Africa announced that Saudi Arabia has now officially joined BRICS. See Reuters, Bloomburg, US News, and many other organizations from 1/31/2024 and 2/1/2024 headlines. Updates are needed! 12.233.244.107 (talk) 14:19, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
Saudi Arabia should be colored as Invited and Argentina as Declined. Doyna Yar (talk) 19:21, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Saudi Arabia has officially joined BRICS

Many authoritative news organizations announced that South Africa's prime Minister says Saudi Arabia has officially joined BRICS. 1/31/2024 and 2/01/2024 64.185.61.127 (talk) 13:47, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

It seems really flaky https://www.reuters.com/site-search/?query=BRICS — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 13:57, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
Bloomberg got it wrong? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-01-31/brics-gets-boost-as-saudi-arabia-joins-group-of-emerging-nations 14.2.196.234 (talk) 23:46, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Yes. They took on the words of another country's minister and ran it. I don't have access to the article, but the headline is factually incorrect as reported by Reuters — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 09:00, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Website

The website currently in the infobox is not the BRICS website, it is the 2023 South African conference website. This is: https://infobrics.org/ 14.2.196.234 (talk) 23:51, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

If you have (or at least like to learn) Portuguese language knowledges, you may want to see what @Luan: said at d:Talk:Q243630#infobrics.org, which could give us why this website isn't BRICS official website either. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:39, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

How many countries are active in this organisation?

2402:8100:3186:D14E:3AEE:58CE:C3DF:9DC (talk) 15:14, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

'President of Russia' should be changed into 'Dictator of Russia'. Same for China

DISRUPTIVE
Disruptive WP:FORUM-y comment that has nothing to do with improving the article. — kashmīrī TALK 12:32, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Self-explanatory. 2A02:A03F:677C:F700:8913:8031:C2F9:E2F6 (talk) 16:05, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

 Not done — DaxServer (t·m·e·c) 16:41, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Why? Do you deny this statement? 2A02:A03F:677C:F700:DE0C:2504:91EE:BA1D (talk) 12:21, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

BRICS members are 10

Brazil,Russia, India, China, South Africa, Eygept,Ethopia,saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Iran 118.179.166.161 (talk) 09:23, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Relevance of China sovereignty note

Is there really a good reason for the note about China's sovereignty? I don't think it's particularly relevant to China's membership of BRICS and it's only used in the members table, nowhere else. Can it just be removed? Voltaic181 (he/him) (talk) 18:04, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

I agree - while theoretically truthful, this seems too tangential to the article and table in question. I can see it being merged into note [c] though, with a brief mention of total claimed area vs controlled area. IdentityCrisis (talk) 03:45, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 May 2024

Memebers newly included in BRICS include saudi arabia not mentioned here. Sejalchaturvedi (talk) 11:36, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. we mention that Saudi Arabia has been invited to join but has not apparently accepted yet. Need a source to support if they've joined Cannolis (talk) 11:45, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 June 2024

72.39.200.116 (talk) 02:29, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Thailand has now joined BRICS 72.39.200.116 (talk) 02:29, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 02:31, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 May 2024

Saudi Arabia has joined BRICS. Source - [2]. Add that too. 2409:4073:495:B3E8:5450:46BA:D773:38D7 (talk) 14:42, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: It didn't. Please see the sections above — DaxServer (t·m·e·c) 15:01, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
@DaxServer Have you ever read [3]? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 05:29, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Saudi arabia also added on 2 jan 2024

Saudi arabia added on 2 jan 2024 Deepak200520 (talk) 12:36, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

No, it didn't, see the article body — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 12:43, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
@DaxServer Have you read [4]? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 08:41, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
Please see the Reuters reference in the article. — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 17:16, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
@DaxServer So, you think the guancha.cn is unreliable?! Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:31, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
I have no clue what that website is. You can reach out to our editors at WP:RSN to determine the reliability — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 08:00, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
The Reuters article is based on a comment to Reuters by "an unnamed Saudi Official", which is hardly a statement by the Royal Saudi Government. How about Bloomberg: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-01-31/brics-gets-boost-as-saudi-arabia-joins-group-of-emerging-nations 14.2.196.234 (talk) 23:47, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Sorry no. Reuters reported they haven't — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 08:59, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
Sorry, triple yes. The BBC says the Saudis are in. The Japan Times says the Saudis are in. Bloomberg reports that the chair of BRICS - South Africa - says they are in. Reuters reports that an unnamed source says they are not. Who is the more reliable source - the Foreign Minister of South Africa or an "unnamed source". Can we at least pretend that we are being impartial regarding this article? 14.2.196.234 (talk) 07:29, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
Reuters report is the latest reporting on the issue and thus invalidates other reports that you quoted — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 09:21, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
BTW, the BBC quotes Reuters' report from Jan 31 [5] but did not consider the following report [6] because the BBC updated their article at Feb 1 13:59 GMT while the Reuters report was published at 16:48 GMT. Japan Times is a Reuters syndication from Jan 3. — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 09:30, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
You have yet to explain how an unnamed source allegedly talking to Reuters takes precedence over a statement by the South African Foreign Minister. It hardly meets WP:RELIABLE - we don't use content provided by unnamed sources anywhere else on the encyclopedia. 182.239.146.143 (talk) 03:19, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
Try reading Source protection — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 18:04, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
I would love to recall for a re-judge for reliability of Reurters, @DaxServer Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:48, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
WP:RSN is thatway — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 08:30, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
@DaxServer Note that you have pinged at zhwiki due to the same Reuters source, where the same Reuters source cited by zhwiki is described as "Saudi Arabia confirmed to officially participant in the BRICS (沙特阿拉伯确认正式加入金砖)" Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:12, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
@Liuxinyu970226 I don't speak the said language — DaxServer (t·m·e·c) 08:36, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Also it's "you have been pinged" or "I have pinged you" but not "you have pinged" — DaxServer (t·m·e·c) 09:10, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Why on earth a swath of sources and the majority opinion on this discussion thread is being overruled by one stubborn editor?
Can we overrule him already? Hes wrong and therefore is making the article misinformation seeing as Saudi Arabia IS in BRICS. 190.210.75.136 (talk) 00:01, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
He's not wrong. Saudi Arabia has not officially joined BRICS yet. Bloomberg said 4 days ago that Saudi Arabia is "studying" the idea of joining. Business Insider, on the same day, described Saudi Arabia as a "potential BRICS candidate". They will probably become an official member, but they have not yet, unless you've read something that I haven't. Philomathes2357 (talk) 01:39, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
So every news agency is wrong, south African leader is wrong, every video on YouTube reporting on this is wrong, everyone is saying the same thing but they're all wrong and they're all just letting us believe something that never happened... why? Are you saying Saudi Arabia, BRICS and the whole universe of news agencies are all conspiring to not come out and clarify saudia Arabia's actual position? The entire world is repeating this supposedly false information being propelled and they're like "nah, let's not correct them", is that what you're saying?
idk how this websites hierarchy system works, but can we just override it already? This is bonkers. It's like we're giving ears to a delusional conspiracy plant that's trying to gaslight all of us (and Wikipedia readers) into something everyone knows not to be true? he's whole theory lies on one unsourced unbacked Reuters story that's now being repropagated... Isn't that how fake news work? 201.216.219.251 (talk) 02:22, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
Saudi Arabia did agree to join BRICS, and that was widely reported at the time. But then, Saudi Arabia took a step back and said that they would like to think things through in more detail before officially joining. So, their membership is in a state of limbo. It's a bit confusing, which is why some news outlets and YouTube videos say that Saudi Arabia has joined, without addressing the nuance. They will probably join at some point in the near future, especially if the "petroyuan" is adopted, which is currently being discussed, but that remains to be seen. Philomathes2357 (talk) 03:36, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Should this article be renamed to BRICS+?

Considering it has grown beyond the 5 member states, it seems reasonable to rename it BRICS+.

216.165.212.4 (talk) 23:08, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Yes, BRICS+ seems very appropriate. As of the morning of February 1, 2024, this article lists 9 nations in BRICS. But many authoritative news organizations announced on 1/31/2024 and 2/1/2024 that Saudi Arabia has now officially joined BRICS. So the "+" would accommodate any number of countries, and the abbreviation BRICS only highlights five of them. 64.185.61.127 (talk) 13:55, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
No, it's not what sources use — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 13:59, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
What do you mean? The official website says it is called BRICS+.
Link: https://www.brics-plus.com/ 2001:8003:9100:2C01:B4A5:A908:5BED:21A3 (talk) 00:56, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Support Yes, the new organisation is called BRICS+. 2001:8003:9100:2C01:B4A5:A908:5BED:21A3 (talk) 00:49, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Support BRICS+ (or BRICS Plus) is already being used in scientific literature - brics plus - Google Scholar Pedro H.V. Santos (talk) 09:13, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Oppose Apparently you forgot to check brics - Google Scholar — DaxServer (t·m·e·c) 07:51, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
support brics, brics+, 'brics plus' is commonly used across all sources and it makes practical sense Jetsettokaiba (talk) 04:01, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Support There are news and universities using the term BRICS+ with plus sign. Could this be mentioned in the article? I guess it's not official yet. [7] [8] [9] [10]. Web-julio (talk) 17:30, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Saudi Arabia is part of BRICS

Information needs to be updated to include Saudi Arabia. It is a full member of BRICS. 122.150.166.109 (talk) 02:46, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Info can be found here, amongst other sources: https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/saudi-state-tv-says-kingdom-officially-begins-membership-brics-bloc-2024-01-02/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.150.166.139 (talk) 02:54, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Will add. Web-julio (talk) 17:19, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:BRICS/Archive_1&oldid=1249022234"