MicroWiki:Good articles/Nominations/Archive 12

From MicroWiki, the micronational encyclopædia
Jump to: navigation, search


Aleunnic Czardom

Nominator: Tsar Stefan I (talk). 2:40PM, 1 January 2021 (EST)

I know it isn't much, but since the Aleunnic Czardom is relatively new with relevant info and references, it could work. Any comments on how to improve it is appreciated.

  • WITHDRAWN From the comments received, I've decided to withdraw this article and probably renominate if more info gets added. Tsar Stefan I (talk). 3:03PM, 2 January 2021 (EST)

Overturn GA status of State of Berin

Nominator: Tsar Stefan I (talk). 2:40PM, 1 January 2021 (EST)

Not a lot of info, no pictures other than flags, and the lack of references.

  • SUPPORT For good articles you do not only look for articles that meet the expected criteria for an article of its category—i.e. the necessary images, expansive and well-written information, citations—a good article should encompass above average material which defies expectations; while information/length is not an issue for this article, as neither is references, and it is of historical importance, there is nothing exceptionally amazing about the article. In fact, it would be improved with at least one physical image, and the text could nevertheless be expanded a bit and do with some refreshing for grammar and spelling, such as the unnecessary bold text for its flags. ★ ♥︎ Zed 。 (talk | edits | full) 23:49, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
  • SUPPORT As above. ricky sup? 02:30, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
  • SUPPORT I believe that I was initially going to oppose this, but I decided to support this call because even though I think it could be updated, Good Articles are meant to stay as.. good articles. Unfortunately, this one isn't right now. (User:ReesesPuffs, Puffs I)
  • COMMENT I the believe that this article must have been worthy of being a good article by the time it was created, and its historic relevance, when it comes to good articles, should be preserved. But I understand that for today's standarts the article isn't by far a "good article", it is too short and simple, although well done. I'm just not fond of the ideia of witch-hunting older good articles which, for today's standarts, aren't that good, otherwise we might start something that could end in chopping the list of good articles by the middle, hypoteticaly speaking. Arthur Brum (talk) 21:24, 11 January 2021 (UTC)


Nominator: Arthur Brum (talk) 19:59, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

I believe the article fulfills all the required criteira. It is well-written (specialy if one takes into account that the micronation isn't natively English-speaker), it speaks coherently and reasonably in all of the micronation's facts and matters without going into unnecessarily detailed mega-texts, it provides a fair amount of sources, quality images providing detailed descriptions with no false/simulationist claims, it does not magnifies the micronation, it is honest on its position, and its structure follows the Wikipedia countries' articles' pattern. Arthur Brum (talk) 19:59, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

  • SUPPORT Ebenthal's article is one of the most elaborate on entire MicroWiki, especially considering that it's from a relatively recent micronation. Without wishing to dwell on Ebenthal's regional importance as a micronation of preponderance, the work done to create a first-rate article has been achieved a long time ago, surpassing several articles accepted as good and which, due to elegance, should not be mentioned. However, once the quality threshold has been established, it's undisputed that this article far exceeds expectations and that failure to recognize its quality is more a political or xenophobic statement than a sincere opposition for some failure in it. This article has already been submitted for consideration and has been rejected; fair or not, the author dedicated himself to perfecting the article and now, there is little to criticize negatively, being more than apt to receive qualification, but being truly worthy of being placed in a differentiated rank, being an example for articles to be written in the future. Karno-Ruthenian Imperial Government (talk) 18:17, 01 January 2021 (UTC)
  • SUPPORT This is a great article, being a template for detailing a micronation, and with a high level of information, details and references, the Ebenthal article reflects the great nation that is. Sildavia Government (talk) 17:26, 01 January 2021 (UTC−3)
  • SUPPORT Tsar Stefan I (talk) 3:31PM, 1 January 2021 (EST)
  • SUPPORT This is by far the most well written article at this website, it is rich in information and content and I think it deserves the title of 'Good article'. Villa Alicia Government (talk) 22:03, 01 January 2021 (UTC)
  • SUPPORT This is one of the best written articles on Microwiki, that still does not have a GA tag. I would like this article to be a Good Article on Microwiki. Oritsu.me (Oritsu.me) 7:08, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
  • SUPPORT I have absolutely no idea what Karno-Ruthenian Imperial Government is talking about but I am sure somewhere in there are good reasons to support. ★ ♥︎ Zed 。 (talk | edits | full) 23:36, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
  • SUPPORT As above. ricky sup? 02:30, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
  • SUPPORT This is a not a good article but it is a gold article. This page is an inspiration to other micronationalists in aiding them to creating a way of writing about their nation in MicroWiki.Chandrachur Basu (talk) 19:11, 13 January 2021 (UTC+5.5)
  • SUPPORT Nice page, I recommend that others take inspiration from it. StefanSNG (talk) 16:46, 25 January 2021 (UTC)


Nominator: ★ ♥︎ Zed 。 (talk | edits | full) 21:27, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

  • SUPPORT Tsar Stefan I (talk) 4:36PM, 1 January 2021 (EST)
  • SUPPORT This article definitely deserves good article status. It is well written, well referenced, and is expansive. A big yes from me! Flag of Australis.svgDaniel RoscoeEnquiriesMy Work 16:00, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
  • OPPOSE Oritsu.me, (talk) 8.07AM, 25 January 2021 (IST)
    • COMMENT Change vote from oppose to support, Oritsu.me, (talk) 8.23AM, 25 January 2021 (IST)


Nominator: Ela'r'oech Charles (Ela'r'oech Charles). 12:00Am, 3 January 2021 (CDT)
I think it's grown a lot since the last time it was submitted. Some "biased" things were removed. Yadda Yadda, let's see how it works this time. If y'all gonna oppose, please lemme know why and give feedback.

  • SUPPORT I like the article, it's informative and explanatory. Kaiser-Koenig Christoph I
  • SUPPORT Should note that in foreign relations it should state the name of the nation. Overall, it's good. Tsar Stefan I (talk) 12:00PM, 1 January 2021 (EST)
  • SUPPORT Yes! I think this article is honestly amazing and provides a lot of information useful to any micronationalist. It's fairly a "new" micronation but it's got a good-looking article and I believe it's worthy of GA status. Not to go off topic, but I was really disappointed to see it get revoked the first time, especially when someone used "MW@D Discrimination" and claimed it to be biased, when it is just in the Elarian culture that unfortunately it is believed they are discriminated against. And that person who said it was biased... was a moderator! Really? Proving the point of that sentence right there. But now that I'm done with my little rant, I really do think that this article is worthy of the GA status especially with more informational changes with the map and such on the infobox. User:Anthony Ramirez 3rd 3:12PM, 3 January 2021 (CDT)
  • OPPOSE Sections are rather stubby and some parts are worded rather badly. The Civil War section embodies these problems whilst also making absolutely no sense to the reader without context. Some dates utilise an incorrect date format and the article seems rather biased (and again make no sense) in sections . There are also a few spelling and grammar mistakes sprinkled throughout the article whilst some parts are written in both past and present tense AND first and third person. Some sections go into far too much detail and are quite messy such as the foreign affairs section - instead of having a defined section for recognition, organisations, foreign relations, ect. these groups are needlessly clumped together.Empire of Aenopia flag.png Logan (Aenopia)  Terry Tibbs talk to me  Look at what I've done. Empire of Aenopia flag.png 22:27, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
  • WEAK OPPOSE Article is stubby in certain sections like Ela'r'oech after Charles and MW manual of style is not followed so it is a no from me. it doesn't even have a government section like a MW about a nation should. Isaiah (Chat)
  • COMMENT May I be informed as to which sections you believe are stubby? As said If you oppose giving Ela'r'oech the GA status please inform me of what I can do to amend this especially regarding bias. I am currently editing the article still as I was during the last time the article was submitted to hopefully amend anything I notice myself and add details.(Ela'r'oech Charles)
  • COMMENT Thanks for the info. Will update to amend. Please check it afterwards and perhaps consider changing your position.(Ela'r'oech Charles)
  • OPPOSE Much improved since last nomination, good prose, well-written in most parts and perfect images, though some sections are rather confusing, such as "It was founded accidentally by Charles Madgett in 2018, then in 2019 he made another nation which went defunct for a while until 2020, when on 15 August, it was purposefully established", which should explain more on how it was accidentally and later purposefully founded. Some subsections of its history are short, and I would remove the ones under "Pre-Ela'r'oech" - I would also move Locations and Climate into its own section titled "Geography". I agree with Logan (Aenopia) on the foreign affairs section. Furthermore, all date formats should be dd/mm/yyyy, so not September 16, 2020 or 16th of September 2020, but rather "16 September 2020". Also contains mild spelling mistakes or sentences that can be better worded. ★ ♥︎ Zed 。 (talk | edits | full) 02:11, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
  • COMMENT I am confused though as to why there are any people necessarily opposing the GA Status of this article for the reason of Charles is listening to them and this article is continuously updated. I feel like a good amount of reasoning for these "oppose" views have been amended. (1/2) (User:Anthony Ramirez 3rd)
  • COMMENT (2/2) Charles has been waiting and patiently amending this all listening to the opposition, which is one thing I really respect and I have seen votes change before so I stand with him with reminding you and advising you to change your vote. Do not look at Ela'r'oech's article once. Look at it every day or a few times a day. There's many changes to it constantly. I see it as ; you're never voting for the exact same article in this nomination. Please listen to Charles when he advises you to change your vote. Please look at this article constantly, study it's changes. (User:Anthony Ramirez 3rd)
  • SUPPORT I always liked Charles, however it won't give me any bias when saying this article genuinely blew me away first reading it. Looking at the "OPPOSE" section it would say that there are incorrect date formats (there are none), stubby sections (there are none, maybe one or two I didn't catch), and bad grammar (which I'm admittedly not too good at so I wouldn't know), but at face value without nitpicking I really liked the article. But I'll also admit GA status is for those nitpicked articles that are still good. Could use some more work but I'm gonna support this one, since I really agree with Anthony, but I also agree somewhat with Logan (Aenopia) on the Civil War section. I'm sure it was worse before anything was said about it, but maybe that section could be removed or just expanded upon. I also don't think it fits in History/Ela'r'oech Era. Maybe Domestic Forces/Civil War would have been a better area for it. (Puffs I)
    • REJECTED Austenasia (talk) 11:20, 25 January 2021 (UTC) - 4:3 isn't consensus

Kingdom of Burdette

Nominator: Isaiah (Chat)
I would like as much feedback as you can give I also wanna see how good the article is.

  • SUPPORT I wrote it and think it's good quality. Isaiah (Chat)
  • OPPOSE Zero images, lack of references, sections need expanding such as Economy, could probably do with a few more blue links and overall the article could do with expansion. Empire of Aenopia flag.png Logan (Aenopia)  Terry Tibbs talk to me  Look at what I've done. Empire of Aenopia flag.png 10:41, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
  • SUPPORT Definitely could use more images, but I helped expand the economy area and it doesn't look too bad. Could use more work but it does look like a good article. Charles
  • COMMENT I added quite a few images. Isaiah (Chat)
  • COMMENT The opening is good, Etymology could be worded better, Geography is a bit short, and Climate can be expanded (i.e. "In general, the climate of Burdette is cool and often cloudy, and mid-year temperatures are generally warm, sometimes hot."), Government and Law and order have minor sentences which could be worded better and can have more blue links. Also if possible images of the land would help improve the overall feel of the article. ★ ♥︎ Zed 。 (talk | edits | full) 03:43, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
  • COMMENT I will beginning fixing the things you have named.
  • SUPPORT Tsar Stefan I (talk) 12:22PM, 19 January 2021 (EST)
  • SUPPORT Oritsu.me (talk) 8:00PM, 25 January 2021 (EST)

Kingdom of Trebor

Nominator: Ives Blackwood (talk) 19:23, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

RESPONSE It's slim pickings for images about the golden toilet joke nation that lasted for about a month, but I've added an image of Trebor mints — with which the country shares a name and a colour scheme — and of Glastieven E. I did think about adding the Myré flag to the 'Position in Glastieven history' section but I don't want to encourage the confusion! —Ives Blackwood (talk) 09:08, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Ecologist Republic of Bartonia

Nominator: Jak123 (talk) 13:51, 22 January 2021 (CET)

January voting

Voting is now open for January 2021's Good Article! Please vote below, by signing your username ("~~~~") underneath the approved article you think best deserves Good Article status.

The first five articles are included in this month's vote due to having been approved last month.


Kingdom of Burdette

Nominator: Isaiah (Chat) 01:30, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

It got passed the first stage last time I want to see how it does this time.

Flag of Australis

Nominator: Flag of Australis.svgDaniel RoscoeEnquiriesMy Work 01:35, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

I believe this page is worthy of Good Article status. I have expanded it to be as expansive as a flag page can be, included references, images, and a great amount of detail. Flag of Australis.svgDaniel RoscoeEnquiriesMy Work 01:35, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Gymnasium State

Nominator: AtomCZ (talk) 07:41, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Rather than actually aiming to get Good Article status right away, I'm interested in ways to improve it, but if it was approved I wouldn't complain.

  • OPPOSE Don't get me wrong, this is a lovely page and definitely has potential as a Good Article. However I feel as if a majority of sections are too short and could do with some expansion. The culture section could also do with a few images but otherwise it's a great article. Empire of Aenopia flag.png Logan (Aenopia)  Terry Tibbs talk to me  Look at what I've done. Empire of Aenopia flag.png 09:29, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
  • OPPOSE I love this article! It's got loads of references, which is good, includes lots of images which is also good, but the main place where this article is brought down are the stubby sections. For a nation established in 2016, the history section could be exponentially expanded. Also, go into more detail on how the Government works. Other than that, it's pretty good. Look forward to seeing the edits! Flag of Australis.svgDaniel RoscoeEnquiriesMy Work 11:51, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
  • SUPPORT Amazing article and only requires a few fixes as mentioned above. ★ ♥︎ Zed 。 (talk | edits | full) 13:36, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
  • OPPOSE The article has potential but as per Logan Ross some sections are stubby. Isaiah (Chat) 13:44, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
  • OPPOSE I think the article is on the right track towards reaching GA status, however, the history section could use some work in the sense of an expansion. Also, a few illustrations would help reach the article towards Good Article Status. Other than that, it's very good. Emperor Anthony I (talk) 20:25, 1 February 2021 (UTC)


Nominator: Empire of Aenopia flag.png Logan (Aenopia)  Terry Tibbs talk to me  Look at what I've done. Empire of Aenopia flag.png 09:27, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

I believe that the quality of this article is close enough to warrant GA status, excluding improvements that I'm going to continue making. Always open to improvement.

  • SUPPORT Because everyone else seems to be supporting their articles. Empire of Aenopia flag.png Logan (Aenopia)  Terry Tibbs talk to me  Look at what I've done. Empire of Aenopia flag.png 13:35, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
  • SUPPORT This article is quite good, and about as detailed as you can get for a convention article. However, I feel like more detail should be put into the Content section. Other than that, good work! Flag of Australis.svgDaniel RoscoeEnquiriesMy Work 11:53, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
  • SUPPORT i see no issues with the article. Isaiah (Chat) 13:59, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
  • SUPPORT Emperor Anthony I (talk) 21:55, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
  • OPPOSE Upon closer inspection you notice that some of the text of some sections may be rather confusing to readers. For instance; "In total, 6 meetings took place between 11 October 2020 and 21 November 2020, lasting 42 days in total" should explain that the meetings were for the creation of the convention. It also links to articles that have already been linked throughout (which is redundant), minor spelling mistakes, and some sentences can generally be worded better to be made less redundant. Also what constitutes a "notable nation"? I do not disagree with it, but it is certainly subjective and rather odd to include it. Should be a very easy fix, than I can fully see this gaining GA status. ★ ♥︎ Zed 。 (talk | edits | full) 19:04, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Glorious Anthean Republic

Ives Blackwood (talk) 13:19, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

I reckon that this meets the criteria. The ostensible lack of detail on some matters (e.g. culture, party politics) reflects the fact that the information does not yet exist — the entry is about a nation that is fewer than two hours old. —Ives Blackwood (talk) 13:19, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

  • OPPOSE While this article is very detailed, it lacks sufficient references which are generally a requirement for such long pages about micronations. Also, I would possibly recommend re-nominating once the nation has been around long enough to have the party politics and culture you mentioned. Flag of Australis.svgDaniel RoscoeEnquiriesMy Work 13:30, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
  • OPPOSE Considering the fact that the nation is quite literally a few hours old, I think that it should wait a bit longer to develop itself more in order to bulk up the page before the article is approved. Empire of Aenopia flag.png Logan (Aenopia)  Terry Tibbs talk to me  Look at what I've done. Empire of Aenopia flag.png 13:34, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
  • OPPOSE The culture section is a bit stubby but it has a lot of potential. Isaiah (Chat) 13:57, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
  • COMMENT I do feel like it is too new and the page may be rapidly changing as the nation further develops; generally most GAs should be complete. ★ ♥︎ Zed 。 (talk | edits | full) 17:05, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

GUM Member States Positivity Survey

Nominator:★ ♥︎ Zed 。 (talk | edits | full) 17:01, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

  • SUPPORT Good, but I feel like some sections could be extended, and possibly more references. 17:12, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
  • OPPOSE Some sections, such as aftermath, are very short and need expansion whilst it could do with some more references and images. Empire of Aenopia flag.png Logan (Aenopia)  Terry Tibbs talk to me  Look at what I've done. Empire of Aenopia flag.png 17:23, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
  • NEUTRAL Aftermath section is short but it's still a good article so I'm going nuetral. Isaiah (Chat) 18:31, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Grand Republic of Cycoldia

Nominator: 𝙷𝙸𝙼 𝙲𝚑𝚛𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚒𝚗𝚊 𝙸 𝚘𝚏 𝙲𝚢𝚌𝚘𝚕𝚍𝚒𝚊 (𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 17:35, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Been trying to get this to GA for a while now, if anyone has critisisms on it also I want to be able to know, Thanks!

  • Support Looks like every nominator is voting support on their articles.-𝙷𝙸𝙼 𝙲𝚑𝚛𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚒𝚗𝚊 𝙸 𝚘𝚏 𝙲𝚢𝚌𝚘𝚕𝚍𝚒𝚊 (𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔)
  • OPPOSE I think this article is well referenced, and very detailed in some areas. However, I find the lack of consistency with that detail to really bring this page down. Sections such as History need to be updated to even include the year 2020. In addition, the Government section could go into more detail on how the Government works and how the different branches interconnect with one another. Also, the Diplomacy section could be improved in aesthetics, as well as better explaining the foreign policy. Also, make sure to go over and proof read the page, I found a couple of grammatical and spelling mistakes here and there. Flag of Australis.svgDaniel RoscoeEnquiriesMy Work 17:45, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
  • OPPOSE ^^^ Empire of Aenopia flag.png Logan (Aenopia)  Terry Tibbs talk to me  Look at what I've done. Empire of Aenopia flag.png 17:48, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
  • OPPOSE As above Isaiah (Chat) 17:57, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
  • OPPOSE I think the diplomacy section could be formatted better and perhaps the full details of the section would be better for a separate page. Emperor Anthony I (talk) 20:18, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Republic of Wendatia

Nominator: Flag of Wendatia.png jonas | talk 17:31, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Any tips? First time of me nominating a GA. I think it meets most of the criteria

Saspearian Declaration of Independence

Nominator: Emperor Anthony I (talk) 04:31, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
  • SUPPORT A fantastic article that fully meets all criteria. ★ ♥︎ Zed 。 (talk | edits | full) 19:05, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
  • SUPPORT Tsar Stefan I (talk) 8:50PM, 5 February 2021 (EST)
  • OPPOSE The article is well put together and the references suffice for the type of page. However, I did notice several spelling and grammatical errors on the page, such as a lot of words being capitalised when they shouldn't be. It wouldn't be a huge task to go over it and make some edits. Flag of Australis.svgDaniel RoscoeEnquiriesMy Work 14:49, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
    • COMMENT I have made several grammatical corrections to the article. Emperor Anthony I (talk) 21:01, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
      • REJECTED Austenasia (talk) 10:40, 22 February 2021 (UTC) - Precedent is that 2/1 isn't enough

Republic of Matthewopia

Nominator: User Mh06941 talk ☼ 01:32, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Nominating again after some improvements. User Mh06941 talk ☼ 01:32, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

  • OPPOSE This article could get up to scratch easily with your editing skills. However, the main issue which jumps out at me is that the page has a lot of stubby sections. If at all possible try and expand these sections by filling relevant information in, and this is going to sound like I'm telling a primary schooler, but consider who, what, when, where, why and how for expanding these sections. Flag of Australis.svgDaniel RoscoeEnquiriesMy Work 14:54, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
  • OPPOSE As above. A few changes and I can see this getting GA. ★ ♥︎ Zed 。 (talk | edits | full) 17:30, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Department of the Interior (Dracul)

Nominator: MissED the Target (talk) 06:54, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
  • SUPPORT Sluke91 (talk) 07:04, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
  • OPPOSE The length of the article is good, but there are no references and I found quite a number of spelling and grammar mistakes. User Mh06941 talk ☼ 02:18, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
    • Examples please?--Moist the Target 00:50, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
    • REJECTED Austenasia (talk) 10:40, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Snagovian Federal Republic

Nominator: StefanSNG (talk) 12:28, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Well, I for one don't think it is worthy of being a GA just yet, but I would like tips! What should I add? What should I change?

  • OPPOSE Definitely needs more references, and one thing I noted is that the article flips between Snagov, the nation and the country. I'd recommend sticking to one instead of changing. Some sections such as the ones in Demographics are rather stubby and could do with some expansion. There are far too many redlinks, and some sections could be worded a bit better. Other than that it's a very good article that with a bit of work could be worthy of GA status.
  • OPPOSEToo many red links Isaiah (Chat) 12:54, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
  • OPPOSE As above - I would like to see Military expanded as well. ★ ♥︎ Zed 。 (talk | edits | full) 23:30, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Commonwealth of Dracul

Nominator: Moist the Target 00:51, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Charles Ross

MSTarget (talk) 10:06, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
  • OPPOSE Good length, images and well-written, however it could use some citations, and some sections like Personal life and Political views are rather short; perhaps they could be merged. Additionally the Quotes section is odd. ★ ♥︎ Zed 。 (talk | edits | full) 23:36, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

February voting

Voting is now open for February 2021's Good Article! Please vote below, by signing your username ("~~~~") underneath the approved article you think best deserves Good Article status.

The first four articles are included in this month's vote due to having been approved last month.