Talk:Micronational superpower

Untitled

@Z Luna Skye What? What is your edit? You removed a revamp because of the reasoning "Why have these here in the first place then?" 1. What is 'these'? What are you referring to? Are you referring to the disputed? I'm saying it's disputed because really only micronations which are superpowers based on notoriety would not be disputed. The reason for this is we don't have a SET definition of a micronational superpower, so theoretically the term and everything you call a micronational superpower is disputed so I don't understand why you basically undid my revamp. Ela'r'oech Charles (talk)

@Ela'r'oech Charles: I removed Cycoldia and Dracul as they seemed like very arbitrary micronations to call "superpowers", e.g. compared to Liberland, the late Hutt River, Lonely; or, even, rather than more notable ones in the MicroWiki Sector, such as Adammia or the historical Abelden, Yabloko, Wyvern, etc. The source provided for St.Charlie proves that adding content that is not 'disputed' as you say is very much possible. And – despite there being no set definition – micronations such as Sealand, Molossia and Austenasia are frequently regarded as 'superpowers' in the community by many micronationalists, more so than Cycoldia or Dracul. As for the section – you are correct about it having no definition, but that is partly why I removed it. I doubt that when most micronationalists hear the term 'micronational superpower' they think of a micronation that "has effectively been able to conquer a previously existing micronational sector". That definition is what took up well over seventy percent of the article, and the old wikitabled list essentially made the article look like a list of the most powerful micronations by sector. Furthermore, the sentence "In modern usage, there are two types of micronational superpowers" seems to suggest that their are only two set definitions, as opposed to there theoretically being no widely accepted definition within the community yet. The other reason was for frequent edit waring, and – I may be erroneous here – it looked like people were just directly inserting their own micronations into the article and saying they 'controlled' an arbitrary percentage of said sector. I would not be further opposed to your definition being added back if you really think it to be noteworthy enough, but having disputed content or a list of sectoral micronational superpowers adds undue weight and is just not necessary. ★ Luna ♥︎ (talk | edits) 03:05, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

I do wish to point out that the article in its current state is trash nonetheless, and it certainly needs expansion with more entries. Actually, I really want to work on this article but there are just no sources discussing the topic. I think the best option would be for consensus to be reached on this talk page on a criteria for inclusion so that the article could be expanded with examples (e.g. a certain rank on the MicroWiki Influence Survey?). ★ Luna ♥︎ (talk | edits) 03:08, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

I would say that Dracul is a superpower, but certainly not Cycoldia. --Terry - Zeprana (talk) 21:27, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

I am not sure if there is any merit in keeping this article around, there are no objective criteria and people are only going to add their own nations here, which kind of defeats the point. If your micronation is a superpower, it should only be added to this list by others, if at all. I would recommend rewriting the article completely (possibly adding that micronations commonly self-style themselves as superpowers) or outright deleting it. --Luxor (talk) 22:56, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Deletion

"Micronation" and "Superpower" are oxymorons. The article in general is silly and pointless. It was created for the sole purpose of self-aggrandizement (though this aspect was later moved to Great micronation, and in and of itself has no merit on the wiki. The topic is an oxymoron. We don't need more lists of "who's who". I vote to delete this article. /swέna/ 💬 04:07, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

I disagree with the proposal—the article is definitely poor in its current state, but I would be willing to copyedit it because micronational superpowers as a concept are definitely notable and a real thing; for instance, we have an article for the Big Three who's micronations can be very validly argued to be superpowers. It is quite non-controversial to say that the Holy Empire of Reunion was a micronational superpower in 1997, or that Shireroth was a micronational superpower between 2001 and 2006; that Scientopia and New Europe were micronational superpowers of the MicroWiki sector in 2009, etc. There are definitely valid examples of real micronational superpowers. We can simply just revert anyone who randomly adds themselves IMO. This article can be quite relevant to intermicronational history we written correctly. ★ ZabëlleNB ♥︎ —formerly Z Luna Skye— (talk | contribs) at 04:18, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

I see that apparently St.Charlie used the term in a news article, but it carefully used the following language: "once considered akin to a superpower". This is not the same thing as "was a superpower". Where else has this term been used, historically? If there is no great historical use of the term, I would suggest we consider chosing something else, as "micronational superpower" is kind of inherently oxymoronic. That said, I do follow your logic. Erusia definitely fit this bill, too. In any case: I've withdrawn the deletion request. /swέna/ 💬 04:35, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

In fairness the term is fairly recent, being first attested in mid-2009 on MicrasWiki. It has, however, been used quite a few times by various micronationalists; it is the addition of micronational to superpower, a macronational term, so quite a few micronationalists have separately conceived it. An individual search shows that it has over 20 uses on MicroWiki dating back to at least 2010, including being a classification on four classification systems for micronations—which may be noteworthy when I copyedit this article later today. It also has three uses on micronationalist Twitter and on r/micronations (excluding uses by the same user) each dating to after 2019. In Flandrensis' "How to start a micronation" web page it is mentioned, and Stormia made a video discussing the usage and validity of the term. But there are a lot of micronationalists who instead declare themselves to be "superpowers" instead of specifically using "micronational superpower"; so, the concept is more widespread than the term. I do see your point about it being rather oxymoronic, however I do not know of a more common (or otherwise justifiable) term that could replace this one. ★ ZabëlleNB ♥︎ —formerly Z Luna Skye— (talk | contribs) at 06:02, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

I went ahead and merged the stubby Micronational superpower article into Great micronation. I'll let the Great micronation article be for now, but please clean it up. /swέna/ 💬 04:21, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

...And then unmerged them, per discussion in the Discord. Sorry for the trouble. /swέna/ 💬 04:35, 20 June 2023 (UTC)