Talk:Microstate

1001

São Tomé & Príncipe official parliament page says the country has 1001 km2. See

http://www.parlamento.st/

See tags: SOBRE O PAÍS > PAÍS —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.41.228.228 (talk) 03:12, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

(no header)

Just out of curiosity: how small must a microstate be to be considered one? (Is Luxembourg a microstate?) D.D. 11:49 Jan 20, 2003 (UTC)

Sealand, which is listed on the micronation page, has been recognised by the courts of Britain and Germany to be a sovereign state, and thus should rightly be on the Microstate page, not the Micronation page. It has also been recognised by the British Home Office. In this, Sealand has as much right to claim sovereign status, and be categorized as a microstate, as the Knights of Malta. More, even, since Sealand at least has sovereign territory, while the SMOM does not beyond an 'embassy' in Rome. - Mike Lorrey 18:26 1/27/05 EST

Official diplomatic recognition is not a "recognition" by district courts or even the Home Office. It should be the diplomatic recognition by the whole government including the Foreign Office--Yuriy Kolodin (talk) 01:24, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Do you have any reference for these classifications? David.Monniaux 14:35, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I would be happy to see references.

Who uses this term?
Ruhrjung 01:05, Mar 5, 2005 (UTC)

This term is used in geography. However, it's difficult to find a definition on the Web. For example, here [1], [2] , [3] microstate is defined as a country with population of less than a million people. In this paper there is some interesting background of the term and another definition (population os less then a 1.5 million pepople) TG 18:30, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Such arbitrary population standards are unsupported by history. Before the US Constitution was ratified, the freed colonies were all fully sovereign governments, most of less than 1 million population. Were they 'microstates'? I think it is clear that if a state gains diplomatic recognition by any nation that is widely recognised itself, then the new nation should be considered a state. If it's small, call it a microstate. And I don't care if they take a frivolous attitude to governance either. If more nations took their nationhood a little less seriously, there'd be a lot less strife in the world.Mike Lorrey 01:32, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Another point of contention: I also believe it is improper to count historically real nations that once existed as 'micronations', particularly those that held significant amounts of territory, like Sarawak or the Indian Stream Republic, which would today rival many fully recognised minor nations like Bhutan, Lichtenstein, Andorra, Brunei, etc. 155.212.77.162 01:35, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I agree that it's inappropriate to use population criteria listed above for historical nations. The 1 million people limit can be applied exclusively to modern states. The term microstate is used to classify states and it's meaning depends on the goal of classification.

In modern economical and social geography population limit of 1 million people is appropriate. In some cases it's possible to use territory area to classify states (A micro-state then, is usually a state that is no bigger then Luxemburg). But historically this term was used together with the concept of "great powers" in Europe. I do not see how any of these definitions is relevant to historical nations in general. TG 09:39, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

more confusion

The term microstate is sometimes confused with the term micronation. The distinction is that the former are recognized as sovereign states whereas the latter are not.

There are three distinct things here, which the foregoing serves only to smoosh together:

1. a micro-state which is recognized by other countries
2. a micro-state which is not generally recognized (or only recognized by one country)
3. the silly idea of "micronations" which some Internet jokers are trying to spread and legitimize.

We should:

• distinguish between the micro-states and the "micronation" idea
• avoid endorses micronations as "real" or investing them with the trappings of micro-states, such as taxoboxes, coats of arms, etc.
• just say that certain people have declared certain apartments, oil rigs, sunken barges, etc., as having sovereignty - without endorsing or condemning these assertions.
• report on how the rest of the world reacts to, or deals with, these three types of things.

And I could use some help with this, because it's all tangled up - especially Sealand. Uncle Ed July 8, 2005 22:17 (UTC)

In case you want it, I suggest the following to add after the main body of the article. It adds confusion rather than clarifies, but it does bring up a few important points in terms of questioning definitions:

The distinction, however, is not always an easy one. The Principality of Sealand for example has been recognised as an independent territory by British courts, but is most often classified as a micronation. Further, labelling a country a micronation merely because it is not recognised poses the problem of countries such as Northern Cyprus (which is recognised only by Turkey, but is definitely not considered a micronation).

Most micronations lack actual territory to claim sovereignty over, but this is not a sufficient means to distinguish them from microstates either, since this would mean classifying a micronation such as Hutt River Province as being a microstate.

- Aridd, July 27th 2005

I was going to provide a scenario to demonstrate the microstate/micronation ambiguity, but it seems unecessary since there are numerous ones cited above. jmd 06:56, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

That's not really true about Sealand. It wasn't decided by the highest court in the land, and it even appears that the judge based his findings on a misunderstanding of fact. It wad court, not courts. You can bet your last dollar that if anything slightly dodgy was to happen at Sealand the British navy would have it under their control almost immediately. The 'sovereignty' of 'Sealand' is an interesting fallacy. Sealand has no military and no allies, and is essentially powerless whatever a district court might have said. --kingboyk 00:25, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Map

Anyone notice that Hong Kong and Macau are both on the microstate map even though they are not sovereign states? Some one needs to fix that.

Temporary minor states

Can someone put in links from here to the lists of minor states and Soviet states that existed mostly in the period 1917-23? Came across them the other day and cannot seem to find the lists again - Green Ukraine and Kingdom of Poland (1916–1918) were on the lists) - and people generally might wish to explore the topic. Jackiespeel (talk) 18:16, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Problem of Definition

It seems problematic to me that we're discussing whether to call Luxembourg, or any other country past or present, a microstate. That really isn't something we at Wikipedia should even be discussing. Because we're an encyclopedia, whether or not Luxembourg is a microstate isn't up to us at all. If there's some difference of opinion outside of the Wikipedia community, then our article should describe that difference of opinion. We shouldn't be discussing amongst ourselves whether to include Luxembourg.

I came to this conclusion when I consulted Wikipedia to find out how a microstate is defined. I found this article, but it didn't actually include a hard and fast definition that I could take to the bank, so to speak. If there is no single, specific, and widely accepted definition of a microstate, then we need to lay out, as clearly and unambiguously as possible, the issues central to the debate. If there is a single, specific, and widely accepted definition, then we need to stick to it and let it tell us what countries to include. —CKA3KA (Skazka) (talk) 19:36, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

A minor point re: naming

I did two Google Books searches for "micro-state/microstate" and "mini-state/ministate", using the first five states listed here.([4], [5]) The results showed that the difference in frequency of these two sets of terms is not significant (187 to 146), according to Wikipedia's naming conventions (such as WP:UE). Thus, I thought it proper to give them equal billing in the first sentence. SamEV (talk) 18:37, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Some thoughts

I think that The Military Order of Malta is not a state, so there is no neccesity to present the information about it here. Also I think that the information about disproportionately large influence of the Microstates on the world politics is POV. There is no facts when microstates could influence the world politics beyond their real scope. Politically microstates is very dependent from their bigger partners (a lot of microstates is dependent from USA, San-Marino is dependent from Italy, Andorra and Monaco from France, Liechtestein from Switzerland). Their votes in UN General Assembly often simply copy the votes of their bigger partners, and we can mention this. But we should remove the information about "disproportionately large influence".--Yuriy Kolodin (talk) 00:55, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

What about partially recognized microstates?!

For example, Abkhazia and South Ossetia are the microstates which are recognized by

1. Each other

2. Russian Federation

3. Nicaragua

4. Unrecognized Transnistria.

I think it is better to have special section for such states--Yuriy Kolodin (talk) 01:09, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

What about cases like the TRNC? Or the Gaza Strip under Hamas? 203.145.94.36 (talk) 10:15, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

List of sovereign nations with fewer than one million people

Could we trim this to 1/2 million? None of the nations between 500K and 1M are on the list of nations smaller that 1000KM². I can do the editing but I was wondering if there was a compelling reason for having it the way it is. Someidiot (talk) 00:23, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

... And now the title needs to be changed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.95.142.87 (talk) 19:07, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Definition

I noticed that there is actually no sourced definition for the term in the article, which makes it seem like WP:OR. This is a term used in geopolitical studies though, even though the exact definition might be disputed. Here is one that I found in the Glossary for Political Geography, organized by Joe Naumann of the University of Missouri–St. Louis:[6]

Microstates: The smallest independent States in the world. They typically possess less than 1,000 square miles. Examples include Liechtenstein, Malta, Nauru, and San Marino.

Lampman (talk) 16:00, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Why two tables?

Is there a specific reason to have two separate tables, one for small-population states and another for small-area states? It would seem that a single table with a sorting button would be better.

This table would have the following columns: Population Rank — Area Rank — Country / Territory — Population — % of world population — Area (km²/sqmi) — Region. The reader could click on the sorting button in the Population Rank column or the Area Rank column to reproduce the current tables.

Is there a reason not to do this? — Lawrence King ^(talk) 00:52, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

this is wikipedia, you can fix what is unperfect, and "we" gonna thank you for that, also I am not good enough to do that unique table.--Feroang (talk) 02:57, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

My reason is that there are some countries which qualify only to one list. Bahrain and Singapore have both over 1 million of population. And there are several entries on the population list which are over 1000 km² in area. 82.141.72.212 (talk) 07:42, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Israel

Hi! why Israel is not included? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.255.15.32 (talk) 08:21, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

It's larger than states included in this list. CMD (talk) 15:41, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

0%?

Vatican City having 0% of the world’s population seems to be a bit misleading, seems to imply exactly zero. Should it say something like "<0.00001%"? Or perhaps "<0.0001%" to match the calculation for Nauru? Didn't see any clear guidance in WP:%. --「ѕʀʟ·✎」 06:21, 20 August 2013 (UTC) Makes sense. I like your second option. --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 23:21, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Big country bias

I'm curious about the basis for defining a microstate (on population terms) as under 500,000 people. It surprises me that a country like Iceland would be regarded as "micro". It is small - yes, but micro? I would have thought 100,000 would be the largest cut-off point and 50,000 may be even more appropriate when using terms like microstate. I'd have thought a microstate would have only thousands of people, not hundreds of thousands. 500,000 is way too big. I think this may be a perception bias on the part of people who live in countries with 50 million + people. 121.73.7.84 (talk) 13:25, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps a table of countries which have BOTH a population of 100,000 people or less AND an area of less than 1,000km squared would be a suitable definition of a microstate. That way you also get rid of countries that are clearly not microstates such as Singapore and Iceland. 121.73.7.84 (talk) 11:35, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Looking at the population list there are a several countries that sit around the 100,000-110,000 mark and then a big gap until the next country at around 170,000. For the sake of compromise we could define the cut-off at 150,000 people & 1000km squared. Once we get bigger than that I think the "micro" in microstate gets stretched somewhat. I've been to Tonga and never thought of it as a microstate. Small yes, but not in the same category as Liechtenstein or the Vatican. 121.73.7.84 (talk) 12:23, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Some Improvements

I'm planning on making some improvements on this page.

- Firstly, I'll get rid of the scientific terminology of "qualitative" and "quantitative" definitions of microstates and simply organize it under the header of "definitions". - Secondly, I'll add the two tables together, so all information about the microstates can be found in the same table. - Thirdly, I'll add information about democratic processes and political systems in microstates. Some quantitative research has focused on the statistic likeliness of microstates having a democracy. Others have found that the statistical evidence misrepresents some specific un-democratic processes that are going on in microstates. As there is much scientific research to be found on this by multiple authors (i.e. Anckar, Corbett and Veenendaal), I think it will be a welcome addition to this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OY83 (talk • contribs) 10:56, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Mauritius

Mauritius has a total area of 2,040 km^2 and an estimated population of 1,265,985 (2018) which would seem to indicate that it should be included on the table. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spikebrennan (talk • contribs)

The criteria for the table are: an area less than 1,000 km^2 or a population below 500,000. Singapore and Bahrain meet the size criteria. Iceland, Belize, etc meet the population criteria. Mauritius meets neither: it is too large and too populous. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 01:03, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Sovereignty status

Robynthehode has tried to supress the citation needed tag on the statements which assert that microstates have to be sovereign states and the new sources added which refer to some dependent territories and cases like Bremen in Germany's contexts.[7][8] IMHO a balanced view has to be put forward in this entry that the same term may refer to countries in general, some constituent states under some specific contexts, and sometimes specifically to sovereign ones. 112.120.39.238 (talk) 10:21, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

You need reliable sources that state this not your opinion Robynthehode (talk) 13:38, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Yep there are. 112.120.39.239 (talk) 13:53, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Then provide them here Robynthehode (talk) 08:10, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Precisely what you've deleted from the article. 112.120.39.239 (talk) 09:24, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

What about Gibraltar? [9] 219.76.24.214 (talk) 07:51, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

(The) Vatican City

This article is emphatically not an appropriate place to edit-war about whether the word "the" should be included before "Vatican City". That's a style-guide question that should be addressed on Talk:Vatican City, or somewhere in MOS if it's addressed specifically there. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 20:19, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

In addition to those sources submitted in edit summaries,[10] here're a few more which demonstrate how it's like in actual, contemporary usage: [11][12][13][14][15][16][17]. Is there any talk page relevant to an MOS on the use of definite articles before names of countries? 219.76.24.193 (talk) 07:53, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

In the meantime I'll go ahead and add the word back should there be no further discussion here in the next few days. 219.76.24.194 (talk) 09:26, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

No, that's not how WP:CONSENSUS works. You need discussion and input, and this is not the place to do that. As I already suggested, try Talk:Vatican City. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 14:41, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

And I already asked for a more appropriate venue, meaning that I don't agree Talk:Vatican City would be the best place to do so. And no if there's no discussion input here for so many days (say, a fortnight) there's no point to keep waiting and waiting and not to bring the article in line with the real world. We may always change it again when there's discussion here and new consensus (in contrary to the convention and general practice outside Wikipedia) is established. 219.76.24.214 (talk) 14:03, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

It's a more appropriate place than this because it's an article about the place in question, and (because it's more widely watched) will hopefully get more input to develop a consensus. And if so, it will set a standard for use beyond this article. See here. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 14:51, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

What about the talk page of MOS:Thetitle? Any MOSs on the use of definite articles in article body? 219.76.24.216 (talk) 02:54, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

I've started a discussion on Talk:Vatican City. If you wish to discuss it, go there. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 14:46, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Yep already did. 219.76.24.208 (talk) 13:01, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Maltese population figures

I tried to update the population figure for Malta, because the note explicitly lists it as one of a handful of microstates with more than 500 000 inhabitants - and the figure in the table is clearly below that number. So I looked to the article on Malta and found a population figure indeed in excess of 500 000 and tried to add it to the article. However, this was reverted basically instantaneously. Why? Hobbitschuster (talk) 12:47, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

@Jonathon Phelps: could you please explain your reasoning? Hobbitschuster (talk) 12:50, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Luxembourg

And Luxembourg?--194.224.97.65 (talk) 06:43, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

With a population well over 600,000 and an area greater than 2500km^2, it doesn't meet either of the criteria used in this article. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 15:32, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Then obviously, the OP has a problem with the current criteria. It seems ridiculous to have Singapore with a population of nearly six million and Iceland with a land area of 100000 square kilometres in the same table. --2001:16B8:3136:BF00:8429:FA06:D88E:2E2A (talk) 17:17, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

I think it's more likely they simply didn't read the criteria.

Singapore is sometimes considered a microstate because it has a very small area. Iceland is sometimes considered a microstate because it has a very small population. It isn't our place to say one definition or the other is wrong, so we include them both. A single table is less repetitive, since most of the entries are the same: sort it using whichever criteria you like, and ignore the outliers. -Magic9Ball (talk) 18:08, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

What would the outliers be? 219.76.24.214 (talk) 07:19, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

What about cases that satisfy neither of the criteria but referred to as microstates in multiple reliable sources? 219.76.24.216 (talk) 06:59, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Iceland

How is Iceland a micro state which is over 100,000 sq km and Israel, Palestine, Kuwait, Qatar, Rwanda, Burundi, Eswatini, Lesotho among others not included which are all smaller than half the size of Iceland?😕 Nlivataye (talk) 08:54, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

As described in the article, a "microstate" can be considered either population AND/OR geographic size. 2A02:678:651:6F00:F57D:57B7:7834:171B (talk) 20:52, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

What is going on with Uruguay on the second map?

It seems to have been purposefully moved out of its original place, sitting now on top of northern Argentina! 2804:14C:6586:5868:4973:AA4A:AB6A:19AD (talk) 03:10, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

A few things in that map appear to have been shifted. Unfortunately, it is a png so fixing would require recreation, so I've restored Image:BlankMap-World-v5 small states.PNG for now. CMD (talk) 06:24, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Oh I see why you reverted it, weird what happened with the map. The SVG is available here, I will try to edit it to resuce Uruguay ( https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/BlankMap-World-v6_small_states.svg ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:678:651:6F00:F57D:57B7:7834:171B (talk) 20:22, 14 July 2022 (UTC) I fixed the issue with Urugay, and I increased the text size. Now some very minor issues with text spacing, but all countries should be properly aligned now (I guess). The SVG of v6 was available and my new edited SVG is also available if someone wants to improve further. I didn't notice anything else shifted, but if it is it should be easy for anyone with basic vector graphic competencies to fix.

Saint Kitts and Nevis

Is it ok to consider Saint Kitts and Nevis a microstate?? Considering its population is only 54,122 as of December 2, 2022, according to the worldometer population measurement, why are much larger countries (by both population and size) such as Malta and Iceland are sometimes considered microstates, but not Saint Kitts and Nevis? I looked up “Saint Kitts and Nevis microstate”, and found several sources that said it was a microstate. I only added one source as of now, but if anyone would like to add more that would be good. Gatorbearratica (talk) 22:35, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

If, as your question implies, it is not commonly accepted as a microstate, then it should not be included as an example in a sentence for 'commonly accepted microstates'. The source you inserted said nothing about it being or not being a microstate. It fits the definition used in this article, which is why it is listed in the table, shown on the map and included as a picture. DrKay (talk) 07:56, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

https://www.commonwealthofnations.org/sectors-st_kitts_and_nevis/education/

Gatorbearratica (talk) 15:30, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Other small states

So Iceland which is around 103,000 sq Km is in the list but Israel, Palestine, Lebanon, Kuwait, UAE, Bahrain, Rwanda, Burundi among others which are all below 100k sq Km are not Nlivataye (talk) 15:21, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

If you'd bothered to read the article, you'd have seen that its inclusion is based on population not area. DrKay (talk) 17:25, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

And why are you bringing this point up again 6 months after you did so previously when a perfectly adequate response was made that time? Robynthehode (talk) 19:18, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

The reference to Maurice Mendelson's paper

Maurice Mendelson only wrote in his paper published in 1971 that "[i]n two respects it may be doubted whether... the Vatican City meets the traditional criteria of statehood". That fell slightly bit short of arguing it "does not meet". I took the liberty to edit that paragraph in this article (and two other articles) to stick with how Mendelson put it. (On a side note 210.177.181.150 had in their edit added the better source needed tag, apparently because Mendelson's paper was published more than half a century ago. Indeed, Mendelson quoted (on page 613) in this paper Rosalyn Higgins's 1963 work that "no diminutive State had yet been admitted to the UN". This is no longer the case since the 1990s (Liechtenstein joined in September 1990, followed by San Marino in March 1992, Monaco in May 1993, Andorra in July 1993, Palau in December 1994, Nauru in September 1999, and Tuvalu in September 2000 – all earlier than Switzerland did). In his paper Mendelson argued (on pages 614 and 615) Liechtenstein "is something of a borderline case", and that "[t]he sovereignty of Monaco is more restricted". On page 613 in a footnote he went so far to have noted that "this is a convenient point at which to note that it is generally agreed that Andorra is not a State". We all know these are no longer relevant in 2023. Yes one may argue his observations regarding the Vatican City which are quoted in this Wikipedia article are still valid, even though many other aspects of the paper have long been outdated. Yet it is always better to supplement this with an additional, newer reference. Just my two cents.) 115.165.166.111 (talk) 18:22, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Cabo Verde

In 2012 estimate, the population of the country is 494,974 and I think I might add this to the 2012 population fewer than 500k table because I know the figure for the criteria I think. .caiify3623. (talk) 00:49, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

There's a 2021 census here that shows the population above 500,000. There is no reason to use an outdated estimate. MrOllie (talk) 18:02, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

1970 estimate

I could make a table of countries with fewer than 500,000 people according to the 1970 estimates. 2800:CD0:AD34:AB00:1555:27B9:591A:D86C (talk) 03:17, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Microstates with limited recognition

Abkhazia, Artsakh, Northern Cyprus and South Ossetia that, for sovereignity and partially recognition can be considered microstates .caiify3623. (talk) 00:20, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

That would amount to taking a side in controversial disputes over territory, something Wikipedia should not be doing here. MrOllie (talk) 02:49, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Question

What is included on the table of microstates instead of the states with limited recognition. .caiify3623. (talk) 02:58, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Who can be considered a microstate? .caiify3623. (talk) 02:59, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

What is considered a microstate based on the reliable sources cited by the article. You've got to stop editing this article based on your own opinions and not based on the sources. MrOllie (talk) 03:00, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

What to do to not get edits reverted .caiify3623. (talk) 03:02, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Base your edits on reliable sources and follow core Wikipedia policies such as WP:NOR and WP:V. MrOllie (talk) 03:05, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

What is going on with the UAE, Qatar, etc on the table?

The countries article had population above 1 million but the other countries on the table are less than 500,000, now there are sitting on top of the table.on .caiify3623. (talk) 02:01, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

This article is absurd

The article makes it entirely clear that what is or isn't a 'microstate' is a matter of opinion, with no agreed definition, and then purports to provide a list of them. Since combining data based on multiple criteria into a single list is WP:OR, the list needs to go. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:50, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Have at it, it's a vandalism magnet anyway. MrOllie (talk) 00:51, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Ok, I'll delete it. Since it is entirely possible that there may be objections, I'll explain my reasoning in more detail. As it stands, the criteria for inclusion appear to be synthesis. The criteria - "Sovereign states with a land area less than 1,000 km2 (386 sq mi) and/or with a population of less than 500,000 people" appears not to derive from any specific single source, but rather to be a conflation of several different definitions (note 'and/or') in a manner that results in a much more inclusive definition than any single source would support. It isn't a 'list of microstates', it is a list of states that might possibly be described as such if one cherry-picks a preferred definition for a particular item, and ignores the fact that other definitions (used to justify inclusion of other states) would exclude it. WP:SYNTH is explicit on this point: Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any source. And an article based on sources presenting such varied and contradictory definitions would violate WP:NPOV by favouring one over another even if the definition wasn't a Wikipedia concoction. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:51, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Question

Why the article European microstates exists here but not articles of microstates from other continents? JrBooyah (talk) 23:08, 20 January 2024 (UTC)