User talk:Austenasia

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

Archive

Please leave any messages for me below. Note that Austenasia does not consider non-solicited requests for diplomacy from micronations. Formal communication of any other nature should be addressed to austenasiapm@gmx.com - this page is for discussing matters related solely to the administration and upkeep of MicroWiki. Austenasia (talk) 15:09, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

First official Conzorica talk with Austenasia

Dear Emperor Jonathan I,

I,the Conzorica President.So,nevermind.But we happy to know your Austenasia famous nation,if we can talk agreement in peace era,that is a good milestone in first step.

Data on website really problem when I got a message from Austenasia government,you can forgive me.
We Conzorica is a friendly state,if you want tour,we were welcome you to Ipoh.Don't worry.
Thank you.

President of the LFR of Conzorica, Ossetia Yon(replace name)


I have protected the article. No more editing will be allowed for over a day. If Belia edits it again after that time is up, they will be given a temporary block if the edit is unconstructive. Now if you want to continue the debate amongst yourself, please take it to the UM talk page. Austenasia (talk) 16:41, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, this is what i wanted to hear from you. If Belia should continue with its vandalism, then i will signal again to you. Fabriziodg91 (talk) 16:46, 12 November 2015 (UTC)


Hashima's vandalism

Hashima is all day vandalism in our page in microwiki, please stop it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Democratic Republic Belia (talkcontribs) 19:29, 13 November 2015

I've only fixed the article, there was wrote that Belia is a member of the United Micronations, but is totally fake because it has been expelled and banned. Oh Austenasia, please check to the tweet that i just got from Belia on Twitter: "@Pr_Hashima NON CAMBIARE NIENTE SULLA NOSTRA PAGINA, COME NOI NON CAMBIAMO NIENTE SULLA VOSTRA. VAFFANCULO COGLIONI! ADDIO". He said to me, in italian, to don't change nothing on his page, as how he doesn't change nothing on mine. FUCK YOU ASSHOLES, GOODBYE. You are free to go to my Twitter (@Pr_Hashima) and check that is true. Please, this is too much, take actions over Belia! Fabriziodg91 (talk) 19:47, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
I've given them a 48 hour block. Austenasia (talk) 20:35, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
Can you fix that mail error's too technical for you to fix it and send me that activation code? --Dilly Mackey, President of the Commonwealth of Pennsyltucky (talk) 21:51, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Account DRB 00, will this story have an end?

Seems that Belia, after that Überstadt blocked him for indefinite time two of his accounts, created a new one, this time is DRB 00. I hope You can do something more, seems he never will stop to create other accounts. Fabriziodg91 (talk) 17:55, 17 November 2015 (UTC)


We explained already by email that we want to continue with our project. We can't understand how if we change something in your page of Hashima, we broke your freedom of speech, but then if you change the page of Belia and we edit we are in vandalism.
Problem not solved again, check to the new account DRB 01... We will arrive to DRB 99, or we will stop this right now? Fabriziodg91 (talk) 20:05, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Banned again. With each new account he makes, he gives us another IP address to ban. Eventually he'll run out of IP addresses. Austenasia (talk) 20:16, 17 November 2015 (UTC)


Hello, we want only to improve our micronation on Microwiki, we don't want any fight any problem else with Hashima and we don't want any kind of relation with Hashima. Hashima talks so often about their freedom of speech which is ok for puts what they want in their microwiki page and too in our. We are asking only to improve our micronation, that's all, so please, let us to improve our micronation free, we will not have any kind of relation with Hashima, we will care only about us and about United Micronations 2015, THAT'S ALL! so we are ready too to sign a treaty with Hashima to not agression and to ignore each other micronation. But please let us our freedom to improve Belia.

Best regards.

I see, then just hope he'll run out of IP addresses. However, here's another one, DRB 02... Seems he has a lot of IP addresses. I'm sorry Belia, but after all that you did and said especially to me, i'm not interested to have relations with you and your DR Belia. I don't sign treaties with someone that after some days change ideas. However, i'm not interested in relations with persons with your behavior, sorry. But feel free to ignore me, please, i will do the same. Fabriziodg91 (talk) 21:33, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

This is still a thing? Okay then. Bob Christ (talk) 21:34, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Belia. STOP. If you want to be on this site then you have to follow the rules. WAIT FOR YOUR BAN TO EXPIRE. If you make one more account to evade your ban then it will become permanent, and your articles likely deleted. You've been warned. Austenasia (talk) 21:36, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
That was fast. "User talk:DRB 03‎; 21:39 . . (+130)‎ . . ‎MediaWiki Default (Talk | contribs)‎ (Adding welcome message to new user's talk page)" Bob Christ (talk) 21:41, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Indeed. So fast that, to be fair, he probably hadn't seen that yet. Austenasia (talk) 21:43, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
That's fair enough. Still, after something like six alt accounts... does he still get the benefit of the doubt at that point? Bob Christ (talk) 21:46, 17 November 2015 (UTC)


Hello, we only want to improve our micronation page, we don't want any kind of relation with Hashima, just to improve our micronation, and the only thing we see it is that we have to be out of microwiki. Also nobody of administator answered our emails. So our only wat as to create a new account.Our account have been banned forever.We waited already our block for 2 days, but forever? we don't want our micronation will die on microwiki. We hope this situation will finish and that both micronations will live without any kind of relations. So please, let us. Best regards
I hadn't realised your block was indefinite. I've changed it to a month (the one on your original account). Now please, just wait. Last chance. Austenasia (talk) 21:54, 17 November 2015 (UTC)


We can't be one month out of microwiki, we want to improve so many things in our page, please give an email an we talk there. this is the only way we have to talk

This really shouldn't be a problem, and yet it is. Belia, you've been banned. Accept that fact, wait, and then you can re-join. Frankly, you're just making yourself look silly. Mcarthia

...You know what? I'll unban your original account. Here's an opportunity for you to improve your article. Do that, stay out of trouble, and we'll see how things go from there. Austenasia (talk) 22:06, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Thank you so much for your compression, could you unblock too our ip? Also we will like this situation will not happen again. So we will like to make some rules for us and for Hashima, we will respect all rules, we don't want to be more than others, but too we don't want to be less. So we will want the same rules will be apply for us and for Hashima or Westcorea.


Searching the end of this conflict, we proposed this agreement [1]
Personally i will not sign this, for two simply reasons. The first is that You already showed that You don't take care of formal agreements (see what happened with UM), and second (and most important) You should read the rules of MicroWiki. Everyone is free to edit every article. You don't have the property of Your article, as how i don't have of Hashima, Whestcorea doesn't have of his and everyone other too. Everyone is free to contribute to every article of this website. Of course, contribute following the rules of MicroWiki (exactly what you didn't, because you started several edit warring and several vandalism, reporting fake news and publishing accuses to several users, without evidences. Oh, i was almost forgetting, you also showed me your infinite education, insulting me on Twitter through your personal account, in matter about to property of your article). Rules that seems You completely don't know. I'm sorry, but i will continue to follow the rules, and i will continue to edit, in constructive way, every article that i can improve with my personal knowledge. Publishing this "agreement" you just showed definitely that you don't want to follow the rules of MicroWiki, because you have already been warned about this thing by another admin (i don't remember his name now). Fabriziodg91 (talk) 09:47, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Series of unconstructive edits

Hello Mr.Jonathan,

I'm contacting you in regards to the religion in micronationalism article. After you protected the religion template, that of which I am glad for, it appears that Markus II of New Israel has decided to go further by inserting counter-productive edits into the said article.

He has not only added dubious information, but he has even made the monotheistic category broader than it already is. This person refuses to have other non-Christian yet Abrahamic/Semitic religions featured by the Apostolic Church of New Israel, all due to his personal bias. This has been counted as bias because Abrahamic religions are defined as monotheistic religions of West Asian origin, emphasizing and tracing their common origin to Abraham (or recognizing a spiritual tradition identified with him).

The input about several states choosing an established religion is unnecessary as well. That information was already provided in the third paragraph which states: "In the micronational community, several individuals have formed their own religions. Most religions created in the micronational community are developed as serious attempts at alternative religions. Several are created in protest to already existing ones while some are developed as hobbies, or, in a similar way that a micronation is devoted to (developed merely for the sake of developing)."

It seems that he even dislikes the fact that definitions are placed in the monotheistic and polytheistic sections, especially when the definition of Abrahamic religions was added.

I would like to request that you look into this situation, as for MicroWiki ought to be a source of truth, and not of personal, radical and/or prejudice religious bias.

By the way, to further validate this conflict, we must refer to his talk page when he stated: "And, indeed, only Judaism and Christianity are recognized as having any legitimacy in my eyes and the eyes of the New Israeli church." This leads to the condemnation of bias as well, as for he only considers anything Judeo-Christian, or at least Orthodox or Catholic as being worthy forms of monotheism (or, Abrahamic traditions).

--Deutschlandkaiser (talk) 01:36, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

I've responded in the discussion on Mark's talk page. Austenasia (talk) 09:39, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
There's an mail error. You gotta fix it. --Dilly Mackey, President of the Commonwealth of Pennsyltucky (talk) 03:41, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Second Official Conzorica Talk with Austenasia

Dear Emperior Jonathan I ,

Finally removal of the block,I unbelievable hacker really hacks on Microwiki last a few days when I knew the News of "Islamic State(Daesh)" hacks on Wiki. THANK YOU good choice given him an Infinite block and Safe our Microwiki in future .But the problem is we don't know how hacker got our IP address last monday ,we currently worries our page become threatened, if hacker use our IP again everyday,then we will can't be edit our page everyday yet ?!

Secondly,Our page data really problem may be leaked out, if him(vandalist) is really terrorist or criminal hacker, his active is very seriously violated the rules.Hacker who was attempted to framed us got a temporary block last Monday. But it's unfair with us, we were no doing crime,but we got a temporary block that's hacker's plan . So please Emperor Jonathan I continues monitor the user CyberKLFH , prevent him vandalism ,and we needs to avoid get automatic block again.

Thirdly, our page luckily no damage by vandalism hacker ,if Emperor did not block him our page will be next target ,because our nation also claim against Islamic State(Daesh). So I thanks for you again because you safe our page .I thinks the vandalism hacker who incomprehensible and unknown purpose ,may be him(Vandalist) hatred to us ,did you agree with me?

Lastly, I hope Emperor need establish a new system to already block the vandalism hacker out of Microwiki, briefly vandalism hacker already cannot enter all pages of Microwiki. I was Written a warnings in our Conzorica page talk, please Emperor continues guard our page.

Thanks you .


Ministry of Foreign Affairs Conzorica, Ossetia Yon(replace name)

translation

Dear Emperor Jonathan I,

I am a High School Students from Taiwan.

Recently, I set up my Micronation "Republic of Ultratainia",and I notice that Taiwan haven't more information about Micronations.

Therefore I want to translate MicroWiki to Chinese.

(I was learning English Novice)

Best Wishes,

Yoyo Chiu (佑) , Republic of Ultratainia (歐遮塔尼亞共和國)

The Captha is broken

Hello Sir

I would like to inform you that the Captha for creating a account is broken. My friends recently tried to make an account to make their own nations. It said that the Captha was broken if you could please fix this I would be extremely grateful.

Sencerley Senator Gremlin, Ambassador to MicroWiki

Mail errors

Needs fixing

Hey, Jonathan! Can you fix that error? --Dilly Mackey, President of the Commonwealth of Pennsyltucky (talk) 04:46, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Invalian Express

Dear Jonathan,

I'd like to request consideration of the Invalian Express to be considered for the Current Headlines section Here is a link to the news site and my microwiki page https://invalianexpress.wordpress.com/?nomuse=1 http://mw.micronation.org/wiki/Principality_of_the_Kingdom_of_Inival

best Regards King Michael II

I'm not Jonathan, but I am an admin, and I'm going to have to say no to the Express at this time. It has only published one article, so we can't verify a pattern of quality journalism, and the one that exists is not well enough written to qualify under the Headlines criteria. Maybe in the future. Überstadt (talk) 04:38, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

re request Invalian Express

Hello there,

I'd like to RE request consideration of the Invalian Express to be considered for the Current Headlines section as i have improved the site, Here is a link to the news site and my microwiki page https://invalianexpress.wordpress.com/?nomuse=1 http://mw.micronation.org/wiki/Principality_of_the_Kingdom_of_Inival

best Regards King Michael II

Still no. The articles all contain pretty obvious errors, and a few days isn't enough time to establish a reputation for quality. Just keep doing your best for a bit, and it can be discussed again in a couple months or something. Überstadt (talk) 23:39, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Consideration for the Roselandic Herald

I was wondering if I could request that the Roselandic Herald (https://roselandicherald.wordpress.com/) could be considered for approval to publish on the "Current Headlines" section. Thank you.

News Deleted

Hi, last night I posted under 'Other News' that the "Organization for Legitimacy Seeking Micro-States" was created to help micronations seeking recognition of sovereignty on the world stage. I also linked that line to the organization's new website. Today, I came by MicroWiki only to find that had been deleted. It was not posted under the area for approved publications only, nor did it contain any vulgarity or falsehoods. Can you please tell me why it was deleted?

Another user removed it, with "Advertising a website is not the same thing as a news article" given as his reason. To be fair, I'd say he's right; it wasn't a link to a news article, but to a website. It may be a better idea for you to post this on the forums. Austenasia ([[User







Hello austenasia a im king of pays riviere du loup justin 1er

Good Article Review

Austenasia,

I'm sure you hate to be bothered by this particular query, but could you review the article Democratia of New Starland before I consider nominating it as a Good Article? Any feedback you can give to help make this article better would be very much appreciated as well.

Thank you for your time, DNSgov (talk) 03:44, 27 May 2016 (BST)

Sent you a reply on my talk page. Thank you for your input! DNSgov (talk) 21:09, 28 May 2016 (BST)

Okay, I've sent in the nomination, and I've requested that each member of the Grand Council provide some information about their culture, to help me write this subsection. It may take several weeks, as most of our members are in college and have jobs, but the culture section will be completed no later than than July 1st.DNSgov (talk) 21:54, 30 May 2016 (BST)

How do I register a Forum Account?

Forum registrations are disabled. how do I register? Bar27262 (talk) 00:08, 3 June 2016 (BST)

How do you put multiple redirects in an article?

Hey Jonathan, it's Suzuki again. I'm trying to figure out how to have my article, the Democratia of New Starland, have three more redirect links when you type DNS, Raoul Commune or New Starland in the search bar. I couldn't find that function within the article's computer readout stuff in the edit page, nor in any of the available tool bars ("Page Information" tool looked like the one, but I couldn't figure out how to edit it). Where is this information kept, and how can I go about editing it?

Thank you for your time Jonathan. Sincerely, DNSgov (talk) 07:26, 29 June 2016 (BST)

If you're asking how to have all those titles redirect to Democratia of New Starland, create each page separately under the title you list, then make its contents #REDIRECT[[Democratia of New Starland]]. Überstadt (talk) 07:35, 29 June 2016 (BST)
Yep, what Adam said. :) Austenasia (talk) 08:46, 29 June 2016 (BST)

Questions regarding the overhauling of an article

So, I've decided to completely overhaul the Starland Republic and New Pamlico wiki article, which I originally authored about 3 or 4 years ago. I'm attempting to get it in a state that it can become a contender for Good Article status, much like the DNS article. I have a few questions and requests regarding this revamping, the first of which is the naming of the article. The defunct micronation's name is officially the Starland Republic and New Pamlico, but after the founding of New Starland last year we've simply referred to the precursor as DSL-Starland. So, should the article be renamed DSL-Starland or should it maintain the name Starland Republic and New Pamlico? Also, since the article was created by me years ago, under a different (and lost) account, how can I go about reclaiming ownership of that article? Lastly, DSL-Starland was officially succeeded by the San Dover Queendom, but I honestly consider this more of a spin-off of DSL-Starland than a separate entity, and have thus decided to include it's two week history somewhere in the revamped SR&NP article. Thus, I request a deletion of that article, since it will no longer be needed after the overhaul is finished. DNSgov (talk) 22:21, 23 July 2016 (BST)

Going along with the reasoning behind deleting the San Dover Queendom article and transferring its information in the revitalized SR&NP article, I've decided to do the same edits to the New Pamlico Federation article. This is because that micronation, although technically founded independently of DSL-Starland, is so intertwined with the Starland legacy that it would actually be more out of place with its own article than San Dover would. DNSgov (talk) 01:29, 24 July 2016 (BST)
For a historical micronation, you should call the article whatever its subject matter is most frequently referred to, so in this case DSL-Starland would be fine (although mention at the top of the article what the official name was). No articles are "owned" by anyone, so there's no issue in regards to your new account. Add a Deletion template to any article you no longer need once its information has been included elsewhere. Austenasia (talk) 07:40, 24 July 2016 (BST)

Rename this user

Gentle Administrator,
Could You please rename this user, from Stato della Città della Torre to SIA_Gov ? Also the homonym user on the forum should be renamed like above.
Thanks in advance,
SIABandiera.png User:Stato della Città della Torre - Talk - Contributions 11:07, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but unfortunately it's impossible to change the usernames of wiki accounts. It's possible to do so on the forum, though, and so I've fulfilled your request there. Austenasia (talk) 11:53, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
Thank you the same! What if We should create a new user, to solve this problem? Could it be allowed, or will be marked as against the rules? SIABandiera.png User:Stato della Città della Torre - Talk - Contributions 11:55, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
No, go for it, just as long as you don't pretend to be two different people :) Austenasia (talk) 12:33, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the help, of course I'll not pretend to be two different people. SIABandiera.png User:Stato della Città della Torre - Talk - Contributions 12:46, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

My proposal, for Your vision

Gentle Administrator,
Since MicroWiki moved from its original website into this, I do think that the logo should be updated too.
I took the permiss to draw one by myself, what I think could be a nice one, made by a mix of the most famous world's Micronations (from Austenasia to Westarctica, Hutt River, Sealand, Christiania, Seborga, etc...), with the shape of a world globe.
Please find it attached to this my humble message.
I hope to hear from You about my proposal, and i hope that You will like my idea.
With respect,
SIABandiera.png SIA GovTalkContributions 10:53, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Feedback about an article.

Hello, I would like to ask for a little feedback about my article, before I submit it to be voted as a good article.

Thank you in advance.

--Carlo Di Astra (talk) 11:34, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Not yet, I would say. Most sections require expansion and more detail. Überstadt (talk) 08:29, 22 November 2016 (UTC)


What sections exactly?

--Carlo Di Astra (talk) 13:19, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Good article status

Hey Jon,

Could you give me some feedback on what needs to be improved on the article of the Empire of Pavlov before it being able to receive a GA status?

Thanks, Alexander IV | Talk 12:38, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi Deniz - I've made some minor formatting corrections. There's not really much wrong with the article at all, but I would suggest that you fix the red links and provide a better translation for the text in the Imperial Standard. The two main things I would fix, though, are 1) add photographs - there's not a single one, not even of your land claims - and 2) provide information about how Pavlov is mostly known for its far-right views and flat earth theory. Austenasia (talk) 09:00, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks Jon! Chi-rho.svg HIM Aleksandr IV TALK 09:38, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Can you delete the page 'Postnationism'?

The ideology referred to by the word 'postnationism' was changed to 'prenationism'. So, can you please delete the original page? Misterms (talk) 11:53, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

My mistake, the name of the page is 'postnationalism'. Misterms (talk) 11:56, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Replied on talk page. Überstadt (talk) 01:10, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Tsardom of Romanovgrad

Just noticed Tsardom of Romanovgrad is earmarked for speedy deletion and has been for some time. Just wanted to relay the info.

-Nathan

Thanks! Austenasia (talk) 08:11, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

User:Liam.carignan

Hello, I'm Abigail Juneau (as you can see). I am here on behalf of the Michigan Upper Peninsula Micronational Union, formed by Grand Duke Liam or Liam, I understand the issue you have with him and the mass amounts of incorrect literacy he used in his cites, however, as the Secretary-General of the MUPMU, I'd very much appreciate if you could possibly end his temporary ban? For simple diplomatic negotiations of course.

Also, I'd like to put in that the IP address that I'm using at this moment is infact, MY home IP address, Liam used it before to create the micronation, it was a dual co-ownership until I split from the creation of the micronation and became an allied member. (This is just a given statement to inform you this is not his IP address.)

Best regards, Abigail

He's been given a temporary block of two weeks. He was warned about inserting false information and behaving immaturely, but continued to do so. All he's done on the wiki is make pages with fake information and threaten "wars"; he was lucky the ban wasn't permanent. It won't be lifted early. Austenasia (talk) 09:48, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Alexostan Request for Foreign relations

Hello, We are The Republic of Alexostan. We are currently Established and we are interested to be in diplomatic relations with your country

from: Alex Odeh, President, minister of Foreign affairs, and Defense of Alexostan.

The Republic of Dayane

The government of The Republic of Dayane has decided to recognize Austenasia's sovereignty as an independent nation, and ask that you do the same. Thank you -The Republic of Dayane


Request Permission to Rejoin the Forums

Hey Emperor Jonathan. It's Suzuki of DSL. Listen, I wanted to talk to you about being able to return to the forums. Message me on Skype sometime, if you'd be so kind, so we can discuss it. DNSgov (talk) 17:50, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

What's the word of you starting a dialogue with me to discuss my request? I have been left in the dark for 3 weeks, and I must say I'm fairly disappointed in you for ignoring me this long. DNSgov (talk) 09:14, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

It has been a few months since I first requested being allowed to rejoin the forums. Is there any movement on that, may I ask? DNSgov (talk) 06:35, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Admin consensus is that a permanent ban should stay a permanent ban, sorry. Austenasia (talk) 06:45, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
Alright. I guess that means I'll have to be on my extra best behavior to impress them, eh? DNSgov (talk) 18:36, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
I suppose so; maybe ask again in a few more months and we'll see what the prevailing mood is like then :) Austenasia (talk) 21:03, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
May I request another review? It has been a few a months, and I feel that my behavior lately, especially after leaving DSL, has been noteworthy. Suzuki (talk) 13:06, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
After discussion with the admin team, I have decided to lift your ban on the forums. However, this was not a popular decision, and I must stress that any further infraction of the rules will be met with a permanent ban which I have assured the other admins will not be lifted. Please ensure you read over the rules again just to make sure you're up to speed. I look forward to seeing you contribute once again! Austenasia (talk) 16:27, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Ban this account

Can you ban this account please and its IP? Someone is impersonating me and my vandalizing pages. --F1 green flag.png OIMGov (talk) 19:21, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, which account? Austenasia (talk) 07:57, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

News Feed Query

How does one go about being allowed to have news articles from their country being posted on the main page? DNSgov (talk) 11:26, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Anyone's welcome to post on the "Other News" feed. However, for permission to post on the headlines, simply pass on a link to a well-established publication (not one with only a single news story on, as some people have tried in the past!) to the admins, and consensus will be reached on whether or not it is of an appropriate level of journalistic and literary quality. Austenasia (talk) 15:05, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
Sounds reasonably simple. I've got a lot on my plate right now, but I'll see about giving the Other News feed a try sometime this month. Wasn't sure if I needed permission or something similar to get started. DNSgov (talk) 16:19, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Annoying You for the Second Time this Week

Howdy, Jonathan. It's Suzuki again! A couple of things. First, I would like to inform you that Sunþrawegaz Kuningadōmas unilaterally recognizes the Empire of Austenasia. Usually I'd contact you via Skype to share this information, but I haven't been able to reach you from there for some time now. But, get back to me if you wish for our micronation's have a bilateral relationship. Secondly, I am no longer in DSL. I left that micronation because, quite frankly, I wasn't very happy there, and hadn't been for a long time. I would like to request that my username here on the wiki be changes from "DNSgov" to "Suzuki", to reflect my current (and definite future) standing. Giitu! DNSgov (talk) 19:47, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the update! Unfortunately I don't know if we can change wiki usernames. I'll ask the tech admins. Austenasia (talk) 14:20, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
Um, you deleted Sunþrawegaz's one news article on the "other news feed" when you removed all of the ones from Mark. I have re-added it, if that's alright with you. DNSgov (talk) 14:21, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
Replied on your talk page :) Austenasia (talk) 07:19, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Conflict Resolution

Hello again, Emperor Jonathan. I am annoying you for the third time this week (has it been a week?), to ask your help in resolving a small wiki editing conflict that has come about. E.C Occitanie has officially banned me from his country, as can be found in the article: List of people banned from entering Occitania. My problem is not with this fact (I could care less), but instead with this section right here:

so called Sunþrawegaz Flag.png Sunþrawegaz

The part that gets me is the "so called" aspect of the term. I have removed this small part twice now, only to have it reverted by the Occitanian user. Which is why I'm asking for your advice on how to resolve this conflict. My reasoning behind having "so called" removed has been stated in both of my edits, and is as follows:

"The micronation of Sunþrawegaz does not contain the words "so" and "called" within its official or common name, nor do those terms come about through proper translation from Proto-Germanic."

It should be noted that I have been banned from entering Occitania for claiming the Kerguelen Islands, for which this micronation believes is sovereign French territory that is not to be trespassed upon, and has labeled me as an apparently careless imbecile who is more concerned with territorial expansion then ecological preservation. I am assuming that this gentleman is not very familiar with how many micronational land claims overstep the boundaries of macronational interests. Either way, I would like to see the removal of "so called" from the aforementioned page, as I feel that it is besmirching to not just myself and Sunþrawegaz, but to micronationalism as a whole. I do not feel that me and my project are any more or less "so called" then any other micronation in the community, including Occitania, and I believe anybody else here would agree with that sentiment.

Thank you for your time, and I am hope that this won't cause you too much trouble. DNSgov (talk) 20:46, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

For consistency, I would also like to point out recent edits to the aforementioned page that have been made since my complain was lobbied to you. The first is the claim that I have made "massive editions on Occitanian pages in MicroWiki." This is entirely false, unless two edits on the same page worth 25 bites of information that apply to only two words are to be considered "massive." I'm pointing this out not because I believe the statement should be retracted, but because I believe it was done to delegitimize my argument for having "so called" removed from the same page.
The second point involves the usage of the term "so called." E.C Occitanie claims that its usage, which was again added after this conflict resolution request was filed, as such:
So called means that this micronation is not recognized by the Occitanian administration. This term is use as diplomatic decorum.
I believe first and foremost that the very fact Sunþrawegaz is even on this list proves that Occitania does not recognize my micronation, so the point is moot. Secondly, that information can be found on the page Foreign relations of Occitania, under section 3.4. This attempt at making a "point" is nothing more than an attempt to legitimize a term I believe is entirely uncalled for. If any more similar edits are made, I will make you aware of them as they progress until this conflict is resolved.
Once again, I thank you for your time, Emperor Jonathan, and I hope that this hasn't become a bother for you. DNSgov (talk) 21:37, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Replied on your talk page :) Austenasia (talk) 07:19, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
Apparently E.C Occitanie still does not understand the meaning of the phrase: "On MicroWiki, though, all micronations are equal." The user has loop-holed around the "so called" term and has now put Sunþrawegaz in quotation marks and in italic font. Again, I hate bothering you with this somewhat trivial stuff, but believe you me, this guy has been hounding me about Sunþrawegaz since Saturday, and if I am to get anything out of my less-then-enjoyable dealings with this user, I would like to at least maintain some of Sunþrawegōz integrity. And that integrity includes the correct and unbiased referencing of my micronation.
Again, I thank you for your time, and I apologize that this matter has not been fully resolved sooner then either of us had intended. Suzuki (talk) 13:06, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
It would seem that my complaints to you have been heard by E.C Occitanie, as upon my last message he almost immediately removed the quotation marks and the italics, and has gone about and made an unbiased color-coded system for identifying the nations on that list of his. This I have no problems with, however I will keep you informed if these appreciable edits are reverted. Suzuki (talk) 13:15, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
The formatting that was agree-able to both parties continues to be edited in a biased manner by both Mahuset and E.C Occitanie. The agree-able formatting, which I have told the Occitanian President I have no qualms with, involved the usage of a color-coded table to show that Occitania does not recognize Sunþrawegaz, a true and unbiased fact. However, within hours of this revision, this formatting was abandoned in favor of claiming that I am an American citizen. This is false, as I denounced my citizenry in July 2015 in a display of my commitment to the Raoul Commune, a fact that can be confirmed by several members of this community, including the leaders of Aarbaro and Zenrax. Although I still currently reside in the United States, and I doubt the US authorities believe I am a foreign national, I have yet to publicly reclaim my American citizenship. As such, the only nation I am a citizen of is Sunþrawegaz, and this article must reflect that.
I have twice now reverted it back to the agreed-upon formatting, only to have Mahuset change it wrongly back to the statistic that I am an American and not a Sunþrawegoz. According to Mahuset, the reason behind showcasing me as an American citizen on the list is because the article is from the perspective of the Occitanian government. I was under the impression that the MicroWiki should always display unbiased information, and not from the single perspective from any one micronation, and I voiced my belief in that in both of my reverts.
I am sorry that this has not yet been resolved, but I hope that this issue has not put a damper on your own activities. Suzuki (talk) 16:56, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
I am updating it to what amounts to unbiased information, take the British equivalent to the article on Wikipedia ( w:List of people banned from entering the United Kingdom and you'll see what I mean. The list is maintained and upheld by individuals from the Occitanian government and refers to information as interpreted by such, the easiest example I can name is articles on the Olympics where Taiwan is called "Chinese Taipei" because that's what the IOC (the governing authority of said subject) regards it to be instead of the actual Taiwan or Republic of China. Besides that, it's not only funny but completely ironic that you start an edit war on a page mentioning you as harassing the original author, because by that you have completely proven him to be right in his convictions. --Emiel Sebastiaan Hardy
User Profile User Talk Contributions 17:14, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
Firstly, your example doesn't compute. How one refers to Taiwan has no standing relevance when I am talking about what country I am not a citizen of. Secondly, this is a conflict between myself and Occitania, to be mediated by the administration team. You are not me, you are not part of Occitania, and you are not an administrator, so why you have decided to involve yourself in this is beyond me. Thirdly, you don't know how this began and you don't know why I've been banned from Occitania. They can ban me from entering their micronation for whatever reason they see fit, but the truth of the matter is they have a problem with Sunþrawegaz claiming the Kerguelen Islands, and I have flat our refused to drop those claims. If anybody has actually been harassed, it has been me and Emperor Thomas, as both of us have had to deal with the full brunt of attacks on something as trivial as claiming land, something all micronations do, and something only a few are able to control in the first place.
This website is designed to showcase unbiased information on micronationalism. Being unbiased includes not professing to falsehoods, like the falsehood that I am American citizen. I gave that up a while ago, and I have not looked back on it. But I will not stand for somebody I have never met, and quite frankly I have only been aware even existed for less then a week, telling not just me but the whole world who I am (or in this am not). No, I will stop until this "edit war" until me and Sunþrawegaz are properly represented in an unbiased manner on this site. I was perfectly happy with the changes made yesterday, the ones you keep deleting, as it was unbiased and not false. All I ask is for the page to revert to that and not be changed by people like you who are completely unaware of the situation. Suzuki (talk) 18:24, 17 August 2017 (UTC)


I just wanted to inform you that as far as I can tell, the conflict has exhausted itself out. Since I've changed Sunþrawegaz's purpose, I really no longer see any of this as being an issue. An annoyance, maybe. But at least an ignorable annoyance. Didn't know if you were still working in the background on this one, but nothing has come up from it on my end for a couple of weeks now. So, I guess it's "conflict resolved." And again, thank you for your help. Suzuki (talk) 22:07, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

RE: ""Split""

To clarify -

Yes, we are much smaller than the GUM Community, which has around sixty or seventy people. At present, The Monarchist Republic has eighteen people, and the MAFE has eleven. However, that is by no means 'just me'. I understand that you probably feel we are being ridiculous, affording ourself undeserved status, insulting the values of the old community, and behaving childishly, but that is no reason to lower yourself to insulting us and deleting our pages. I understand that you do not recognise it and that many people do not, but this is not a reason to delete the pages. Describing them as "[p]atent nonsense... pages that contain no meaningful content" is just rude and not a proper application of the policy.

I understand that you don't think we have managed to achieve anything here. However, for us, one active chatroom with nearly twenty members and an ongoing recruitment process on the forums is better than we hoped for. If you do not want to recognise it as a major event, go ahead. But you have no reasonable grounds for deleting the pages or for showing the lack of respect you have done in your messages. I'm happy to level with you and admit that yes, we're a small community. But the accusation that "we both know it's just you" is arrogant and rude at a level that definitely outstrips trying to create MicroWiki pages on the subject that even acknowledge some people's questioning of its legitimacy.

Therefore, consider me to be contesting this deletion, and more personally asking for you to discuss this with me like a sensible diplomat.

Thanks for your time,
Mark S. Kavanah (talk) 06:50, 26 August 2017 (UTC)


Here's my opinion on the whole thing: Up until yesterday, I heard absolutely nothing about a so-called "community split." I'm neither a part of the GUM, nor a part of the Old Guard, and yet I use the MicroWiki forums. As far as I know, almost everyone there does. Yes, you might be considered another part of the community, and you might actually be successful in recruiting members from the forums to your cause. But until this new sect gains its own actual identity and is able to pull from literally just one source for its member base, I think it would be still considered as still very much a part of the larger MicroWiki community in general. I don't see any signs of this "split" manifesting itself on the prominent Skype chats.


I don't see much of anything of that nature happening on the Forums. I'm literally about as much of an "Establishment Outsider" as it gets -- Zenrax hardly shares its citizens with others, for one. Now, if we start seeing an actual split of the community like what happened before my time with this whole Wikia / Wiki business, then I'll eat my words and say "You know what, this guy has a really good point." For now though, it might be best to promote your ideals from within the community as it exists, to change it for the better. Trying to get people to funnel themselves into an artificial "in or out" scenario will only come back to haunt people.
Best Regards,
Zenrax (talk) 04:30, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
Just to clarify regarding the Skype chats, that's actually the main area this has taken place - i.e. the centre of our group is a seperate Skype chatroom and we, at least most of us, left other groups like the RF. The only micronational chatrooms I am in now relate to the new community or individual micronations, and I know the same is true for several other people.
We don't have our own wiki, partially due to financial constrainsts and partially because we never wanted to leave MicroWiki itself. We always wanted to be a parallel aspect of the MicroWiki community and function as parrallel to the traditional set of Skype chatrooms. Johnathan has decided that this is a figment of my imagination and does not want to recognise it. Truth be told, yes I am the only one focussing on creating wiki articles for it, but that's at least in part because other people predicted we would have them deleted. I just want John to let me create the pages and fill them with realistic information, which he can of course check himself to see if it reflects reality, and then be on my way. I was optimistic enough never to expect this discussion to take place, and I would just like to create factual wiki pages on the existence of our smaller sub-community, the circumstances by which we came about and the criticisms we face.
Is that an unreasonable request?
Hoping only to resolve all this,
Mark S. Kavanah (talk) 06:14, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
The MicroWiki community is, by definition, those who use the MicroWiki. And so, while you can claim as much as you'd like that there has been a "split" in the community, a separate Skype chatroom doesn't define that. I've heard of a few of your members and to my knowledge at least several of them are still very involved in the goings-on in the community's core chatrooms. This, in essence, is what Jonathan is saying - there has been no split, and this "New Community" you speak of is - at best - another sector of the MicroWiki community. At worst, I suppose, you could say all it is would be a Skype chatroom.
The main points for your "split" aside (a territory I could speak further about, perhaps another time), I do see the point Jonathan has made. And I'd say it's fair, more so now that you've specifically agreed with it by saying that you "always wanted to be a parallel aspect of the MicroWiki community." And let me make one last side-step to say that making this here news article is in no way going to help convince the MicroWiki site owner of your case. Twain (talk) 15:08, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
I'm going to put my two cents in here. I am the infamous Suzuki, and I can tell you straight up that I'm probably one of the most hated members of the MicroWiki community. However, despite the loathing, I still love and respect this community. Why? Because this place doesn't have a "leader." Sure, Emperor Jonathan owns the domain. But he is so lenient on things. I've been a member of this community on and off since 2012 (before Jonathan even became the owner of this site), as well as being a very inactive member of three more micronational communities. And I can tell you that only in this community will you find the owner not try to influence the micronations that flock to their domain. Jonathan is the most fair community leader, and the most unassuming. I feel that your "New Community" is both trying to harm this man's image (which I can tell you from experience is very much an impossibility), as well as an attempt by yourself to influence other micronations, which I abhorrently despise. Suzuki (talk) 22:32, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
I'm back for more! Just a couple of points I want to make on this "New Community." Firstly, if it's just a Skype chatroom, you can't really call it a community. I run the Skype group Drunkiz Gadurō and it has representatives from 15 micronations there. Can I call the Drunkiz Gadurō a community? No, not really, at least it's no more or less a community than other micronationalist Skype groups out there, like Yellow Bear and the Flagon. Every true community I've been apart of, from the two incarnations of the MicroWiki (I've been around since before the switch in 2013), to the Wikia, to "Mr. Twain's Neighborhood" (which I think I'm the last active user on), and they all have an actual website, an organized forum, and two of them have a wikipedia-styled main site that contain various articles on various aspects of various micronations. Until the "New Community" has that, I don't think you can call yourself a micronational community of any kind.
My second point is this: the only successful split in this community that I am aware of, and Emperor Thomas of Zenrax alluded to, is the MicroWikia (which again, I'm also a user on). Nowhere on that site have I seen an outpouring of information on the Wiki-Wikia split, which you also won't find here either. The only reason I'm even aware of it is because I knew a user (Jackson Alexander) who was there when it happened. And as information on that split is lacking, I can assume that it wasn't article worthy, meaning that the split was never the end-all-be-all of the MicroWiki or the MicroWikia's history. Also, many people are users on both the Wiki and the Wikia, including Emperor Jonathan, who is an admin on the Wikia! Anyways, my point here is that community splits happen; they've happened before, and the'll happened again. But none of the previous splits have ever been article worthy, and unless a legit war breaks out over a split, it will continue to never happen.
Just a side comment that I though of whilst typing: if you're so against this community, then why do you continue to use this community's wiki and forums?
Well, that's my schpeal. I apologize to Jonathan for taking up yet more space on his Talk page for this. Suzuki (talk) 06:14, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

RE: Removal of my news articles from the main page

Hey -

With a due sense of exhaustion and dread, could I ask what policy other than "I'm in charge and I don't like you" gives you permisssion to remove both of my news articles from the main page, including the one unrelated to the edit summary you gave regarding the reversion? Come on here John, you're just proving me and the other people who won't take you seriously right. I'd love to be able to go back to my micronation and write a news article announcing that I was all wrong and you're perfectly reasonable and easy to work with, but when you exchange merely disagreeing with me for taking childish swipes, it gets really difficult to be unconvinced of the notion that you're abusing your power and are taking this all personally (and are therefore not likely to be open to compromise or even reasoned disvussion). Come on, I've asked once before, although you didn't respond. Are you there, John? Can we discuss this politely and reach a situation where we're both able to work with each other and where we're on the same page about the New Community?

Come on, I know you're there :)

Regards,
Mark S. Kavanah (talk) 16:29, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

The article about the wiki page is in analysis and opinion. It's a bit too meta to be in headlines, don't you think? My input on the issue anyway.
Kaiser Newton 02:29, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
This isn't just me. The admins are unanimous in that you are not to use the wiki to promote or advertise this. If you want to make a "new community", make a new site. You will not be permitted to foster division amongst the community here.Austenasia (talk) 06:35, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
...by the way, do you think you could make the effort to actually spell my name correctly? I mean, it's all over the site... Austenasia (talk) 06:37, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
I've not read the article in question, but I do wonder why if he has references that he is not alone in "separating" he isn't allowed to make at least an article on the wiki about that. I do think however it can be better if a third party writes that article though. If he isn't allowed to have an independent article on the matter then how is this a non-biased wiki? Qaragüliyyah (talk) 07:42, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
This categorically isn't a non-biased wiki, John has himself stated that. In essence, because he and the admins of the wiki do not want to allow two communities to use the website, they are expressly forbidding me to make any reference to the New Community on the wiki, in essence. Although I would argue that factual reporting is not the same as 'advertising', I somewhat doubt that anybody will listen to me, given that as far as I can tell, 'the administrators say so' is a perfectly valid substitute for adherence to policies and guidelines on the website.
I am going to recreate one page with the title 'New Community' (New Community), as my contest of the deletion was ignored, and I will keep the page to factual reporting, not to "promote or advertise" the cause, as the administrators have forbidden. If John would like to follow his own policies and be fair, I would recommend he responds to my contest (or responds here), or edits the page to remove any content he believes to be untrue or advertising. Deleting the entire page a third time is against your own policies, and I implore you to continue the trend you have started by finally replying to me and deal with this reasonably.
Thank you for your time,
Mark S. Kavanah (talk) 12:45, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
This shouldn't have to be said, but it's apparent that it has to be. MicroWiki is not a democracy. The MicroWiki costs £160 per year from Jonathan's own pocket, and its ridiculous for you to think you can use the site that he pays for to promote "breaking away" from the community. Jonathan is lax on most things, but I don't expect him to allow you to attempt to tear the community in two using the site that he pays for, and quite frankly you shouldn't expect that either. And let me second what Jonathan said earlier in this thread: this is not just him. He has consulted the admins, myself included, and we have all come to this conclusion. Moreover, I should point out how childish it is of you to go ahead and make the New Community page again, against the orders of the administration. In fact, that's pretty much against the rules in itself. The point here, all in all, is that you shouldn't get to use the MicroWiki to promote breaking away from the MicroWiki. Fairly simple if you ask me. Twain (talk) 17:09, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
I don't see how making a page is promotion, that is to say, if the page wasn't promotion but factual representation of events. If that is against wiki policy then this indeed is not a wiki but a tool for propaganda. Qaragüliyyah (talk) 16:43, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
Very well; I've edited the page to reflect the facts as they've been made known to myself and the other admins. However, as Twain rightly said, you are not to use MicroWiki to promote the breaking away from MicroWiki. The maintenance of community cohesion is one of the main duties of the admin team; that's not "propaganda", that's simply trying to make sure we all get along. The fostering of baseless rivalries and divisions will not be tolerated. I don't know how much clearer we can be. (Also, from now on, I've decided to refer to Kavanah as "Mkar" until he learns to spell "Jonathan"). Austenasia (talk) 17:27, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
Heh, nice work on the page Jonathan, could you just unprotect it please so other people can edit it - I think I'll let some other people do it to avoid the irony. Just don't forget that while you're laughing at us, we're laughing at you too ;)
Mkar "S". Kavanah (talk) 12:45, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
Jonathan, as someone from Glastieve who has been following the proceedings and feels a neutral voice could help you to see it from a rational perspective I would like to point out a number of problems I have with the New Community article. First, Mark has gone into great detail regarding his reasons for founding the New Community in this document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/13YsSTWjizW4YEmTmzXCk2buYXvrLiSJGXkDrEei18SM/edit?usp=sharing. Second, a combination of 'condemnation, indifference, or humour' can hardly be described as 'near-unanimous' since unanimity requires all parties to share one stance and three have clearly been shown. Third, Mark is not the only member, there are currently around 20 members, maybe more if you count affiliated citizens of nations such as Nedland, Glastieve or Masuhet. Fourth, I would appreciate you not accusing Glastieve of 'self-aggrandizement' through the New Community as members of both communities are individuals not countries and this was an entirely independent venture.
Thank you for your time.
Tom McMillan (talk) 23:15, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
How is it nobody in this "New Community" can spell Emperor Jonathan's name? I mean, for [expletive]'s sake, it's all over the website, and after I post this, his name appears 28 times in this Talk page alone, just for copy-and-pasting! I don't know if this is to "get back" at Jonathan, but your "New Community" really sows seeds of doubt in GUM-haters of the MicroWiki community such I myself as to the legitimacy of your so-called "split." Is typing eight letters in sequence really that hard, or do you just appreciate looking idiotic? Suzuki (talk) 00:09, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
Sorry, that was a typo, also I am not properly a member of either community so my actions can not be considered an example of the members' behaviour. I would also like to point out that me and Kavanah should not be mocked for misspelling Jonathan's name when it is already on the page in question, given that Jonathan cannot spell my name when it is on the page in question. Besides, if a significant chunk of your counter argument relies on attacking our orthography then there's something wrong with it.
Tom McMillan (talk) 13:28, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Message from the Administration

Template Help

I created this template, based upon the Wikipedia version. I need it for the Nedland-Sunþrawegaz Flag Contest. But for some reason an odd error occured: "Template loop detected: Template:16TeamBracket." Firstly, what does this mean? And secondly: HELP!!! Suzuki (talk) 07:52, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Turns out we didn't the template. Sorry to waste yet more space on your talk page, Jonathan! Suzuki (talk) 22:03, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

That's quite alright; it's what I'm here for! :) I'm sorry I didn't reply to the original message; I must have been distracted by all the others being left at that time. Austenasia (talk) 06:27, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Page Deletion

I would like to again request, personally as content creator and officially on behalf of the confederal government, that all of the pages related to Delvera and its predecessors which I marked for deletion about 20 days ago be removed from the wiki. Thank you. Sarky (talk) 20:57, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
My original deletions were based off the articles I could find, primarily from your Navbox and categories. Those articles were not in the resources I could find, and I remember specifically asking that we be notified if there are more articles that I missed, and that would've been much preferred than to quietly add deletion templates. My apologies for not seeing the additions, it should be taken care of now. Twain (talk) 4:42 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for complying with the request, though for the record I would like to point out that some of the articles in question were in the navbox and nearly all of them were in the Grand Republic of Delvera category. Further, I specifically mentioned that I marked our remaining articles for deletion on the talk page of the main Delvera page before it was deleted, thus they were included in my original request of September 9. I never received a message asking if any other articles needed removal, but Consul Callahan did and recalls replying that there were indeed more articles.
On another note, the reason I "quietly" marked the articles is that I did not want to cause any further outrage or accompanying censorship and in fact believed that I was following proper wiki procedure as per the deletion policy. I am left to wonder how long articles sit in the deletion queue without appropriate action. But I suppose this is no longer any concern of mine.
Nevertheless, I again thank administration for what was eventually done. Sarky (talk) 03:52, 30 September 2017 (UTC)