Talk:Micronation - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) at 00:18, 17 October 2022 (Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Micronation/Archive 4) (bot). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 00:18, 17 October 2022 by Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) (Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Micronation/Archive 4) (bot)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Micronation is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
July 3, 2006	Featured article candidate	Not promoted

Micronations Start‑class Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Micronations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Micronations on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MicronationsWikipedia:WikiProject MicronationsTemplate:WikiProject MicronationsMicronations
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Start‑class Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

Confederate States of America

Is Confederate States of America a micronation or amicrostate? No country recognized it. But it did have things few micronations have, like a legislature, army, etc. deisenbe (talk) 19:26, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

The Confederacy would be an unrecognised state, that de facto controlled some areas of the southern united states.AxderWraith Crimson (talk) 17:08, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Micronation is a 20th century concept, so I don't think the CSA can be considered as such. Also, while the CSA wasn't recognized as a sovereign state, it was recognized as a belligerent by the United Kingdom. pandakekok9 (talk) 09:10, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

It also wasn't a "micro" anything-- the Confederate States covered close to two million km and were home to nine million people. PepperBeast (talk) 14:20, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

The CSA was a (failed) secession. Literally dozens of similar examples throughout history. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 15:10, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Micronational Organisations section

I would like to make note of a few edits– and revertions as of late, with regards to the newly added micronational organisation section to the article.

Notability aside, the citations within the section are unreliable self-published sources (which I did mark as such). To the credit of User:IslandUnity, the references citing MicroWiki (Which falls under WP:UGC) were removed, but several unreliable sources remain.

The Self-published template I added however was removed– for what I believe to be an incorrect reason. Given that there have been 2 reverts from both parties as of recent, I have opted to bring this forth to the talk page in order to discuss.

Cited Links:

Ciao. Pax Brittanica (talk) 22:12, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Comment: Citing Microwiki isn't WP:UGC as the content/wiki was not made by said user but rather a group of people under the private owner, Jonathan Austen; similar to Misplaced Pages proper. On to the the sources like the GUM or the Grand Unified Micronational, it is very reliable and is the oldest organization in micronationalism respectively. It appears there is a ton of misinformation and lack of research on your part into the subject at hand.--Cookieman1.1.1 (talk) 23:45, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Comment: WP:UGC quite clearly specifies "most wikis, and other collaboratively created websites". MicroWiki quite clearly falls under this grouping. Pax Brittanica (talk) 00:25, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Comment: NCWP isn't collaborative, nor user generated. Neither is the LIN's website, neither is the GUM's website. I've already explained this to you. IslandUnity (talk) 11:14, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

I was referring to the MicroWiki citation, in regards to WP:UGC. The NCWP/LIN/GUM citations themselves are problematic as they are WP:SPS. I cannot find any independent verifiable sources pertaining to these subjects, so either an alternative citation should be found, or this should be removed altogether. Pax Brittanica (talk) 16:55, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Pax Brittanica is correct, as self-published sources are not reliable (such as the GUM and LIN website) and neither are user-generated sites (like wikis). Please do not revert the edit again or add the citations back as they are not reliable. I would advise finding third-party citations (as Brittanica mentioned) that are not closely associated with micronationalism to avoid topic bias. ––Anonymous 7481 (talk) 00:10, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

I agree, Microwiki is not an independent verifiable source. The only 3 micronational organisations mentioned in Russian, French and Italian newspapers and books are the AMU, the OMF and MicroCon. --Delle89 (talk) 15:43, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

The GUM is not under Misplaced Pages:SELFPUB as it is very reliable, and is one of the oldest micronational organizations there is. AWESOMEDUDE0614 (talk) 19:25, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

The site at grandunifiedmicronational-dot-org tries to install crapware when I access it, so... it's worse than not-reliable, it's a candidate for the Misplaced Pages blacklist. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 03:45, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

That is not the correct site, check https://grandunifiedmicronational.wordpress.com/. Also "crapware" really? AWESOMEDUDE0614 (talk) 17:45, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

That site is not an independent source, nor a reliable source, as it is edited by representatives of micronations. - Donald Albury 15:43, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Conch republic: Notable micronation?

I've noticed lately, that Conch Republic got added to the list of Notable Micronations a couple times (by User:SoccerTrackFarm3264, and then removed again each time by User:Meters, who says it is "not a micronation", and that it is a "tongue-in-cheek publicity venture". The first line of the Conch Republic article states it is a micronation, and is also cited twice on this article, once directly calling it a micronation. The talk page over there seems to come to the conclusion that it's a micronation, though not a "serious soverignty-oriented" one, I think? To me, it seems relevant for inclusion on the list, given it's citation elsewhere on the page, but what do others think? --dr-spangle (talk) 13:30, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

I do not know what the inclusion criteria of the list is, but it appears to only list micronations with "serious" claims. I note this because for example the Republic of Molossia (which is more of a tourist attraction and does not seek sovereignty) is not included, despite its large media coverage, and neither is the Aerican Empire (which is largely tongue-in-cheek) among others, whilst the micronations that are listed (i.e. Republic of Minerva, Freedonia, Rose Island etc.) were genuine sovereignty projects that led to government action (such as destructions of the micronations and arrests). But I may misinterpret that, LunaEatsTuna (talk) 14:27, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

I had posted to the talk page of the person adding this supposed micronation asking him to discuss it here. If there is consensus to include it that's fine with me, but I think it should at least be discussed.

I'm not certain this is a legitimate micronation. We call it "tongue in cheek" and a "tourism booster", and even its geographical extent is nebulous. Much of the previous discussion on Talk:Conch Republic was from 2005–2007 and by SPAs and socks. Threads about its legitimacy continue to be raised on that talk page. user:Donald Albury recently made what I find to be a telling comment (albeit it while discussing the legitimacy of the supposed flag): The Conch Republic has no real existance. It originally was declared as a protest against the US government setting up a passport control point in the upper keys, but is now more like a meme, kept alive as a promotional stunt for tourists. Meters (talk) 15:24, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

How about, we follow policy and say that the "Conch Republic" is a micronation if independent secondary reliable sources say that it is. And I hold that "Conch Republic" web sites, travel guides, and blogs do not meet the criteria of independent, secondary, and reliable. I'll just note that the first source cited in Conch Republic, a Miami Herald (a newspaper generally accepted as reliable) article, refers to the Conch Republic as "zany", "fake", and "farcical". - Donald Albury 22:12, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Errant Republic of Menda Lerenda

Is a guardian article enough for inclusion? Here is one: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/18/spanish-driver-hash-cakes-claims-diplomatic-immunity-menda-lerenda - fyi: "menda lerenda" means something similar to "yours truly" in Spanish, see wiktionary.--91.64.240.136 (talk) 01:22, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Based on the the self-description on the organization's website (https://www.republicamendalerenda.net/copia-de-historia), it seems to be a collective Sovereign citizen movement rather than a micro-nation. Donald Albury 14:39, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

The article says, "A micronation expresses a formal and persistent if unrecognized claim of sovereignty over some physical territory," which this does not. While many micronations' purported citizens don't live there, they at least have a "there". -Jason A. Quest (talk) 14:58, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Notable micronations

What are the requirements to add or remove a micronation from the section "Notable micronations", because almost all of them are connected or associated with fraud or financial scam projects? Meanwhile there are micronations like Ladonia (art), Molossia and Atlantium (hobby), Flandrensis (ecologic) and many other projects? The section "Micronations based on historical claims" is more based on facts. I propose to remove the section and just keep the reference to the page List of micronations. Delle89 (talk) 20:23, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Categories: