Talk:Republic of Rose Island

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Republic of Rose Island was a good article, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Delisted version: No date specified. To provide a date use: {{DelistedGA|insert date in any format here}}
European Microstates This article is within the scope of the WikiProject European Microstates, which collaborates on articles related to European Microstates. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale.

This article is within the scope of the Micronations WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of micronations. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Constructed languages, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, and easy-to-use resource about constructed languages, aka conlangs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

If listing this article for deletion or if there is an active edit war, please post a note here.
Constructed languages
Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the class scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
This article is supported by the Esperanto task force.
Map needed
 It is requested that a map or maps be included in this article to improve its quality.
Wikipedians in Italy may be able to help!

Contents

[edit] NPOV

This page needs a whole lot of NPOV-ifying. -- Kwekubo

Done. -- Mpt 04:01, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I very much doubt whether the micronation known as "Rose Island" has ever even existed beyond imagination. I mean, how could one engineer construct a platform on nine pylons, in deep water eleven kilometres off the coast?

I modified this:

The platform's Council of Government sent a telegram(to whom?) to protest the "violation of its sovereignty and the injury inflicted on local tourism by the military occupation", but this was ignored.

removing the "to whom?". It's a good question though. Who got the telegram? I would assume the Italian government. --cprompt 14:23, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

according the article, the name of this "micronation is, in Italian, "Isole delle Rose", which means Islands of the Roses and not Rose Island. --SeekingOne 13:29, Sep 3, 2004 (UTC)

How would you translate Rose Island to Italian, then? —Tamfang 22:41, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

The Italian name is not familiar to me - its presence here predates my editing of the article - however the name that appears on Rose Island's stamps is "Insulo de la Rozoj", which as near as I can tell is expressed in the singular form - but I'm no Esperanto expert. --Gene_poole 22:41, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

it:Micronazione has Isola. -- Error 05:08, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
"Insulo" is indeed the singular form in Esperanto (the plural would be "insuloj"), so "Island of the Roses" is certainly correct. --PeterHansen 23:21, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)

This is the funniest article ive ever read --Zeno of Elea 06:54, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] References

More references (pointers to old newspaper articles, books, etc.) would be nice. Samboy 23:34, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)


I found a website talking of "Isola delle Rose" (this is the right translation, I speak both Italian and Esperanto)

http://www.imperial-collection.net/rose_island.html

there is a picture of the original flag and all the stamps issued by the short-lived republic

I agree with Samboy. Is it possible to find a non-internet reference to this? While this story is certainly possible, it's also outlandish enough that further proof would be appreciated. Dvyost 15:01, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I salvaged the following from the webarchive ghost of a bibliography page no longer available on the Footnotes to History site. It cites pages 129-130 of Erwin W. Strauss's How To Start Your Own Country (Port Townshend, WA: Breakout Productions, Inc., 1999) as a source for this story.

[1] has a link for a podcast where the director of the Esperanto League of North America discusses Rose Island. Bandwidth is currently exceeded, have to wait until tommorow to hear it. commonbrick 17:35, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Arms?

Did the Republic have arms (are they those shown on the flag)? --Daniel C. Boyer 20:43, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Dates of occupation and destruction?

The article only mentioned that the Italian reaction was heavy-handed and swift, are there any dates available to show when the Italians take over the island, and when they destroyed it? deadkid_dk 23:09, 14 December 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Hoax?

At first reading my feeling was "what a shame they destroyed it". Now I'm wondering if the entire thing is an elaborate hoax. I don't know enough about it to decide, but since people have been questioning the veracity of this on this page since 2003 I think it's reasonable to tag the article. I don't know if it's a hoax or not and that's the purpose of the tag - to encourage a process of discovery. --kingboyk 22:07, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

It's certainly no hoax. It's a well-known historical fact. I assume you overlooked the references, photographs and this. Might be best to take some more care before jumping to conclusions in future. --Centauri 22:35, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
I've also restored the Good Article tag - which for the record, I was not responsible for adding in the first place. I'm not sure why you removed it, as the article complies with all the necessary requirements, namely: well written, factually accurate, neutral point, stable, referenced, and contain images. --Centauri 22:56, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
I didn't jump to any conclusions. I simply stated that I don't know if it's a hoax or not. The article didn't convince me, therefore it's hardly "good" I would say. More to the point, it is very lacking in hard sources. --kingboyk 23:10, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
PS [2] is in Italian. Sadly I speak only English. --kingboyk 23:11, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
Finally, you say I missed "this" but where exactly is that link in the article?! I still can't find it. --kingboyk 23:13, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
Being "convincing" is not one of the criteria for determining if an article is good or not, so I'm not sure what you mean by that comment. On top of which there are by my count 3 different references given between the article and this talk page - one of which is in Italian, as you might reasonably expect given that the events discussed occurred in the vicinity of Italy. Finally the link I referred you to was discovered by doing a Google search that took me all of 3 minutes. I will certainly add it to the references. --Centauri 23:21, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Delisted GA

This article achieves all the GA requirements bar one - any images used need to be appropriately tagged. (I try to remember the features of GA using the awful mnemonic BRAWWSTIN - Broad, Referenced, Accurate, Well-Written, Stable, Tagged Images, NPOV; "broad" is not necessarily comprehensive, but no major omissions. This certainly seems to hit BRAWWS- and -IN but not, at the moment, the "T"!) The photo uses an obsolete template and is unsourced, making any verification of PD status impossible. PD seems unlikely; on photographs the usual reasons are: work of U.S. government (most other governments retain copyright - including, I believe, Italy), age (this is a relatively modern photo), or that it has been released by the copyright holder (this seems rather unlikely for such an aerial photograph, whilst it is plausible, something that details the release is necessary). The other picture is apparently released under GFDL by the creator, which is an appropriate tag. Once the photograph is either accurately sourced and appropriately tagged, or alternatively is removed, GA should be reinstated.TheGrappler 04:26, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA on hold

I've reviewed the article and the previous complaint in regards to it, and it seems that the image of the island still needs to be tagged in order to qualify for GA. ErleGrey 01:05, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

It appears that no one is around to shepherd this nomination; I'm going to delist it, since the image is still not properly tagged. Chubbles 07:51, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Similiar occurances

Sealand and other micronations were established during the same period. Shouldn't the article mention that, as context? Fsotrain09 21:58, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Flag Rose Island.gif

Image:Flag Rose Island.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:53, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Flag

The Lonely Planet Micronations guide shows a flag different to the one shown in the article. Does anybody know why this is? Onecanadasquarebishopsgate 17:05, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes. Because the flag in Lonely Planet was created by me a number of years ago based on a written description, without the benefit of photographic evidence. The latter only came to light after the publication of the LP guide. The Rose Island flag is more acurately described as a pennant. --Gene_poole (talk) 18:32, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. That means that the flag caption will have to be changed to pennant. ----- Onecanadasquarebishopsgate 18:34, 6 March 2008 (UTC)