Talk:Lists of active separatist movements
 | Politics List‑class | ||||||
| |||||||
Index
| ||||
|
|
||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Niue
i doubt there is any secessionist movement in Niue (or the Cook Islands for that matter) Bigkev
DUe notice: image for deletion
Better title?
To avoid the conflict about whether autonomism and irridentism are separatism, couldn't we just call it the List of minority nationalist movements?--Yalens (talk) 17:48, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
- Which movements in particular are controversial as to whether they are separatist or not? As a rule, autonomist movements are separatist, while irredentism is not. I have not seen this challenged here. Quigley (talk) 17:58, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
- I oppose a change to the article name. Irredentist movements have their own list List of irredentist claims or disputes, this article should only contain separatist movements, a term which covers both secessionist movements and autonomous movements. BritishWatcher (talk) 18:02, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
- Well, that's also an issue, but its not what I'm talking about. What I'm talking about is that there is a debate- visible on this page here- over whether movements that are autonomist only and/or minority rights (the Hui, the Sorbs, etc.; for an example of something strictly minority rights and not really autonomist one could use Roma organizations) or irridentist (i.e. want to separate AND join another country, like Albanian Greeks or the Krajina Serbs) are separatist. Is separatism a category that includes both of those, or is it a separate category that doesn't include autonomism and irridentism? --Yalens (talk) 18:16, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
- I do not believe Irridentist falls under the definition of separatism as they wish to extract part of another state, people within that state pushing the same agenda would be separatists, but not those in the separate state, which is what irrentists are meant to be about. I dont think they belong on this list. As for autonomous movements, we agreed to the move because that can all be under the banner of separatism. If others have a big problem with this then i would not object to a move to something like List of separatist and autonomist movements, but i think the present title is fine and covers all strands of separatism, although it should be explained it covers both secessionist and autonomists in the introduction. BritishWatcher (talk) 18:26, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
- Well, there is irridentist movements on this list (I will delete them, then). And there are people who do not believe autonomism is included in separatism as well...--Yalens (talk) 18:41, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
- I do not believe Irridentist falls under the definition of separatism as they wish to extract part of another state, people within that state pushing the same agenda would be separatists, but not those in the separate state, which is what irrentists are meant to be about. I dont think they belong on this list. As for autonomous movements, we agreed to the move because that can all be under the banner of separatism. If others have a big problem with this then i would not object to a move to something like List of separatist and autonomist movements, but i think the present title is fine and covers all strands of separatism, although it should be explained it covers both secessionist and autonomists in the introduction. BritishWatcher (talk) 18:26, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
- Well, that's also an issue, but its not what I'm talking about. What I'm talking about is that there is a debate- visible on this page here- over whether movements that are autonomist only and/or minority rights (the Hui, the Sorbs, etc.; for an example of something strictly minority rights and not really autonomist one could use Roma organizations) or irridentist (i.e. want to separate AND join another country, like Albanian Greeks or the Krajina Serbs) are separatist. Is separatism a category that includes both of those, or is it a separate category that doesn't include autonomism and irridentism? --Yalens (talk) 18:16, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
it was better before
The reason for the splitting proposal was this: "This article is currently very long and cumbersome, and difficult to read quickly."
Well, now it is definitely more difficult to read quickly. Some countries, such as Russia or France, have territories on more than one continent. So if I want to see separatist movements in, for example , the UK, I have to go to the Europe article and then search through articles to find out that there is also a separatist movement in North America(Caribbean).
Before, you could just skim through the contents or use the search to quickly find the specific information. Heav 2 (talk) 10:32, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
- But the list was still split into sections when it was all on one page so you could be looking in several locations. Perhaps the introduction should make clear where a separatist movement for an overseas British of French territory would be. BritishWatcher (talk) 10:52, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Article value
Just because a page is split doesnt mean it doesnt need references or notability. Everythign on wikipedia needs to be citwed (if it was split then the references should be in the original), and there is not inherent notability.(Lihaas (talk) 11:33, 24 April 2011 (UTC)).
- There is no information on the page to reference or be notable. I don't understand what your problem with the page is. There are many other lists of lists (see Category:Lists of lists). McLerristarr | Mclay1 16:25, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
redirect
why does list of stateless ethnic groups redirect here? 98.206.155.53 (talk) 00:53, 4 May 2011 (UTC)