This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Micronations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Micronations on Wikipedia. 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 articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. 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 articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Croatia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Croatia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CroatiaWikipedia:WikiProject CroatiaTemplate:WikiProject CroatiaCroatia articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Serbia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Serbia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SerbiaWikipedia:WikiProject SerbiaTemplate:WikiProject SerbiaSerbia articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Europe, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to European topics of a cross-border nature on Wikipedia.EuropeWikipedia:WikiProject EuropeTemplate:WikiProject EuropeEurope articles
The page was recently unprotected upon request and consensus to unprotect it and turn it into a redirect. After looking further, I decided to make it an article as I believe that this micronation has reached the notability guidelines to have its own article instead of being a redirect. If disagreed, it can be reverted back to being a redirect again as per former consensus? I believe it has more notability/sources than other micronations on Wikipedia such as Dominion of British West Florida, Flandrensis, etc therefore eligible for its own page. MicroSupporter (talk) 18:12, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have turned the page back into an article as the admin claimed that the reason for revert was undue weight as its not a real country. That would mean all micronations would have to go. I don't think he understands that micronations are not real countries, and are just fantasy movements. Liberland would have to go too.
I'm a bit confused by both sides of this dispute at this time. On the one hand, Joy is right to point out WP:Other stuff exists--MicroSupporter's arguments regarding the state of articles about other micronations are in a word, irrelevant, and WikiProjects have no special jurisdiction in deciding article content. That having been said, it appears that Verdis has a stronger claim to notability than the last time it was deleted, with significant coverage in the generally reliable La Nacion ([1]) and at least one other new article of unclear reliability ([2]). Are we still short of GNG? signed, Rosguilltalk15:00, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi User:Rosguill. I think that deletion is from 2020 though. Most the articles about Verdis I added like Večernji List (very notable in Croatia) and Página 12 (Argentinian) are from 2021. I think I added some from 2022 too but they don't appear to be as notable as the ones from 2021. Should we maybe do a vote/consensus on whether this micronation is notable enough to be on Wikipedia? It’s definitely more notable than ones like Dominion of British West Florida, Kugelmugel and some other ones now. I can’t find many sources for those ones. Am not sure. I think User:Joy was also confused on the term micronation aswell as he claimed that the article was an undue weight violation as it doesn’t have a real status, but no micronation is a real country, yet I think they should still be on Wikipedia. Difference between micronation and microstate or unrecognised state MicroSupporter (talk) 15:15, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The reference to Večernji list is a [3] says in the title "They founded a state in our disputed territory" - hence the title writer doesn't consider this state to actually have territory - and in the subtitle says "What will they say to that in our Ministry of the Internior, we wonder" - hence the subtitle writer is mocking the idea - and the first paragraph says "They reached out to us via social networks 'You talked about Liberland once and it's not far from the state we're founding' they started." - hence the writer is describing self-promotion by the authors of Verdis. This is, frankly, a mockery of the verifiability policy to consider such a thing as a reliable source for these fringe claims. It's like an egregious example of how to use publicly-edited websites for self-promotion. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 16:52, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Verdis could have zero territory (like Aerican Empire). It still meets the notability guidelines to be on Wikipedia. It's a micronation, not a real country. The idea being mocked doesn't mean that Verdis lacks notability, it means its controversial. I listed the Vecernji List reference as an example of some of the notable sources I added. Take a look at the references. I highly doubt that the Vecernji article is self-promotion either considering the writer is mocking Verdis. MicroSupporter (talk) 16:56, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The article in the Argentinian paper is in Spanish, which I can't verify, but Google Translate says the first sentences are "Daniel Jackson became president at age 14. At least that's what he says." The same paragraph ends with "[Verdis] pursues “a better, safer and cleaner world”. At least on Daniel's computer." This is another example of a serious newspaper covering the topic jovially, facetiously. One can certainly make the claim that the encyclopedia should describe this reality - but then it should describe the reality, as opposed to promoting this fringe idea. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 16:56, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Your argument is that Verdis shouldn't exist because it doesn't have territory. You do realise that micronations are not real countries and are often created as mock states or massive LARPs? Austenasia (its territory is just a house and some other houses of other citizens) was founded by an at-the-time little kid, same goes for Empire of Atlantium. They are not real countries, they are micronations. But that doesn't mean they can't be on Wikipedia. They are often not taken seriously. You will see the same issue for Liberland, on nearby territory disputed for the same reason. MicroSupporter (talk) 16:58, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, MicroSupporter, your case would be a lot stronger if you could cite peer-reviewed academic publications analyzing Verdis. Joy has a point that the way that newspapers are covering the topic weakens the significance and reliability of their coverage, and really newspapers are a rather poor type source for anything controversial. I'm not sure which way I would !vote in an AfD at this time. signed, Rosguilltalk17:03, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That is true, User:Rosguill, but most micronations are fantasy therefore not having any serious articles about them. For example Austenasia has coverage from The Guardian, but it is written in a comical and non-serious sense as you can see in their references. I think some of the articles I referenced in this micronations article are written quite seriously or semi-seriously, but some definitely are taking the mick out of Verdis (understandably, considering its not a real country). It's difficult to find micronations having serious articles written about them, even the ones on Wikipedia to be honest. MicroSupporter (talk) 17:08, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As I stated before, I don't know about every micronation article. Since there's no apparent progress here, I've used AFD to try to gather better consensus. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 18:02, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This shouldn't be a redirect as it's clearly notable enough to have its own article. Verdis has aparently had its passports officially recognized by the Kingdom of Eswatini. They actually have access to the land unlike Liberland and are planning to start construction of buildings. If Liberland has an article then Verdis certainly should. 82.26.250.60 (talk) 23:53, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}
Not done: there is consensus against having such an article. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:19, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
Not done That isn't an edit request. If you want the decision from the last AfD to be overturned, you should go to Deletion Review. --RL0919 (talk) 16:09, 8 November 2023 (UTC)