Talk:Seborga

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European Microstates, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of European Microstates on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European MicrostatesWikipedia:WikiProject European MicrostatesTemplate:WikiProject European MicrostatesEuropean Microstates articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Italy Low‑importance

	Italy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Proposed merge in of Giorgio Carbone

Oppose - merging a notable person into the locality article is, simply, bad editing. If this is done then, logically, we should eliminate all bio articles by merging them into their places of residence. Whatever may be thought of the guy's claims he is the subject of several non-trivial sources thus meeting WP:N. In effect, this is a backdoor delete; the correct route to get a consensus would be an AfD. BlueValour 03:43, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that this is a backdoor delete - the same thing has been attemp

ted with a number of micronation articles recently, including Principality of Seborga, Independent State of Aramoana and one other the name of which currently escapes me. However, I don't believe Giorgio Carbone has any notability outside the micronation of Seborga (as opposed to the Italian town of the same name), and so I feel the best option is to merge his bio into Principality of Seborga. --Gene_poole 03:50, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge -- I would agree with BlueValour that merging a notable person into a locality article is a bad idea, but the problem is that this person is not notable for anything except the locality. DreamGuy 06:27, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Principality of Seborga, which should be retained as an independent article, per my comments at Talk:Principality of Seborga. PubliusFL 20:42, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge - Into Seborga, as per Wikipedia:Notability (people). Hiberniantears 22:20, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment' - if there was to be any merge it would be to Principality of Seborga not Seborga (you merge to the most relevant article). BlueValour 16:00, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment 2 - Both, the principality, and Giorgio should be merged into Seborga. Hiberniantears 13:33, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - Would support a merge of Giorgio Carbone into Principality of Seborga (we had Paddy Roy Bates similarly merged until it was pointed out that he is known for other things), but merging either of them into Seborga would be implying that Seborga and Principality of Seborga were synonymous, it would be very confusing. -- Jao 12:34, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of Seborga

I just saw this video on YouTube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0LhiveRItU It shows a flag for Seborga. It's a very nice flag, and is also one of the kinds that vexillologists whine and moan about and tell us to hate. Anyway, it's in the Wikimedia commons. I just don't know how to put an image in an article. This is a heads up to anyone who does. (Ejoty (talk) 05:18, 31 January 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Possible International Recognition

According to this article one the UK's Times Online website, a consulate from Burkina Faso was opened in Seborga. Is there anything else to back this up? Would this be enough to change its classification to a state with limited recognition, similar to Northern Cyprus which has only one UN member state recognizing it? The exact quote is "Burkina Faso opened a consulate" and can be found halfway down the article. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/obituaries/article6943215.ece Pinbob87 (talk) 00:33, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Burkina Faso did in fact recognize Seborga. I was reading an article in the Telegraph about Carbone saying that other than just opening a consulate, they recognized that state. Here is the link http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/royalty-obituaries/6671765/His-Tremendousness-Giorgio-Carbone.html Pangeanempire (talk) 01:18, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Knights Templar

The infamous Knights Templar, predecessors of Freemasonry, often made trips back and forth to and from Seborga. Their original title (The Poor Knights of the Temple) was bestowed upon the seven founders by the Prince of the city-state in 1118, and their eighth member- a monk- was from Seborga. Should this be noted in the article?

     -Nate (SeraphNB)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seraphnb (talk • contribs) 15:25, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's spurious history that does not exist in any old books, and where would one find the original historical sources for these claims? Certainly not in William of Tyre [1], earliest known reference to the Order. Lung salad (talk) 02:06, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Seborga. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070412225059/http://www.italymag.co.uk/italy_regions/liguria_emilia_romagna/2006/general/prince-of-seborga-fights-on-for-362-subjects/ to http://www.italymag.co.uk/italy_regions/liguria_emilia_romagna/2006/general/prince-of-seborga-fights-on-for-362-subjects/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:45, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merging with Principality of Seborga

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Obviously, I agree. —Mᵒdᵘlᵃtᵒ.📩 13:22, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The micronation is its own subject, the fact that it takes its name eponymously from the town notwithstanding, and it appears to meet WP:GNG. It isn't even clear to me that they're coextensive, though I'm not sure which is the larger entity since, based on their areas as asserted in the respective articles, the micronation is larger than the town but, based on their asserted populations, the town is larger. Largoplazo (talk) 14:53, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Micronation? It's a WP:HOAX, plain and simple. Some residents (not even all of them) have sent a letter to the Italian PM to ask for some kind of autonomy for the small town in order to revive tourism. There are no princesses, armies, currencies or whatever. Latest source: https://genova.repubblica.it/cronaca/2021/01/10/news/seborga_ci_riprova_lettera_a_conte_per_chiedere_il_riconoscimento_di_stato_monastico_autonomo-281926732/ Anyway, your choice, you can leave the articles as they are, but just know any Italian — apart from the "princess", I bet — will find them bizarre to say the least. —Mᵒdᵘlᵃtᵒ.📩 16:43, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Modulato: I wanna made something clear. One thing is a joke disguised as an article, and another a legitimite article that talks about a joke. Sr. Knowthing ¿señor? 16:59, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - Are you distinguishing content on Wikipedia that is a hoax (made-up content; content about things made up by the user) from writing about a hoax that exists in the real world? Micronations are, for the most part, the latter kind of hoax. A real-world hoax, whether or not of the micronation variety, merits an article here if it meets WP:GNG. Largoplazo (talk) 17:21, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    - @Largoplazo: I was making a comparison with Bicholim Conflict with this subject for made clear that, even if the micronation is a hoax (that is not), that doesn't made the micronation don't deserve an entry in Wikipedia (sorry for my bad english). Sr. Knowthing ¿señor? 17:30, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@El Rolo Ueeqee: Note the indentation: I was responding to Modulato, not to you. Largoplazo (talk) 18:21, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

- Comment The "hoax" accusation doesn't really hold water - a micronation is by definition aspirational. To write an article about that aspiration does not constitute a hoax, but I agree that an article should be written in such a way to make it clear that the micronation does not exist as such, but that it is claimed to exit.

Oppose As a micronation, it surpass WP:GNG and WP:GEOLAND says that, in this cases, it is needed an analisys case-by-case. I think the only thing would do a merging of the Principality of Seborga article with Seborga is confuse the readers, someone would think that the entire Seborga town is the micronation, when actually is not. Sr. Knowthing ¿señor? 16:12, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Principality section - factuality

An editor expressed concerns that the section discussing the Principality claim was confusing fact and fiction. I've given it a rewrite and put in more reliable sources. As with any micronation article, any claims of sovereignty are always going to be aspirational, and Wikipedia needs to reflect that. Hopefully it's clear now that these are only claims and the reader should not be confused. Cnbrb (talk) 12:54, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The problem here is that nobody is claiming sovereignty or independence from Italy. The last letter written by a few people to the Italian PM (see the link I posted before) requested more administrative powers in order to revive tourism, but nobody talked about sovereignty or independence. —Mᵒdᵘlᵃtᵒ.📩 11:23, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The text in this article says independence and sovereignty are claimed, and all the sources cited say that Carbone claimed one or the other or both and several say that a vote was held that came out overwhelmingly in favor of independence. How do you figure that "nobody" is claiming these things? Largoplazo (talk) 13:21, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]