Talk:Freetown Christiania

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

A humorous reply[edit]

"In response, the cannabis sellers covered their stands in military camouflage nets as a humorous reply." That wasent a humorous reply.. it is an effort to avoid undercover cops and policechopper from takin incriminating photographs of the drug dealer. -rbp


The residents are hostile to the police, and resent their visits to the Freetown; anarchists claim that society can function without police or other authorities. What happens when a crime is committed? Do witnesses give statements to the police and cooperate with them to catch the offenders, or do they refuse to help the police? What happened in the aftermath of the 2005 shooting? Was anyone caught for it? If so, what happened to them? Best name (talk) 02:16, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

They are not anarchists and Christiania cooperates with the police on anything except the cannabis trade. -rbp

The residents does help the police in non cannabis related incidents:

This article describes how the residents turned over the purpetrator of a knife stabbing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Luphphe (talkcontribs) 08:07, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Christiania cleared[edit]

There is an indymedia-article that christiania was cleared at 15. Dezember 2009. See: [1] - Are there any other sources? Roland Ionas Bialke - 16. Dezember 2009 - 12 Uhr 30 (CET) —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:31, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Christiania wasent cleared in 2009. The booths were removed only for a very short time in 2004. -rbp

In the opening paragraph, it says: "It was closed by residents in April 2011, whilst discussions continued with the Danish government as to its future, but is now open again.[1]" It was only closed down for 4 days; — Preceding unsigned comment added by Luphphe (talkcontribs) 08:51, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

COP 15[edit]

i think a section needs to be added on Christiania's role during the COP15 summit as a base for protesters, speeches, entertainment and the violence and attack by the police on the 15th --Allie Cabab (talk) 13:22, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Do it. Do you have some english-language sources or are you proficient in danish? KellenT 19:37, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


THis article seems very biased towards the community. ElectrifiedSpork (talk) 00:36, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Possible copyright issue?[edit]

The text of this article (and several others on areas of Copenhagen) has been copied directly (along with images) from Wikipedia into an e-book that is for sale on Amazon - the articles were written before the book was published. I believe this contradicts Wikipedia's copyright policies, but apart from noting this here I am not sure how to report it.

This is the book in question: Ellybabes (talk) 18:01, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately I don't think there is much to do about it. We have had several issues of publishing firms that base their entire print-on-demand output on collections of Wikipedia articles, but Amazon hasn't responded when being notified about the problem and the Foundation hasn't got the resources for legal actions against the publishers. Leeches trying to profit off of volunteer work providing free information is simply a condition that we have to live with. --Saddhiyama (talk) 21:27, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
That's a shame, but thank you for your detailed reply. Ellybabes (talk) 21:53, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

"Road block robots" ?[edit]

In the cars section "road block robots" are mentioned. I've just done a bit of searching and can't find a source on what on Earth a "roadblock robot" is, aside from a former entry in the TV show "Robot Wars". Is this some sort of mistranslation? (talk) 03:48, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

I think the name "road block robots" is not very descriptive, but I think I know what the writer means, I saw these when I was there in July - theya re automatic bollards: (talk) 11:39, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Sorry I wasn't logged in for my last note above, it's linked me to a talk page with some negative comments, so I wanted to sign in with my real account. Ellybabes (talk) 11:42, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


What is the sources for calling Christiania a micronation? To my knowledge they've never claimed to not be a part of Denmark. --OpenFuture (talk) 02:38, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

So, there are no sources. Thought so. We need to find another infobox. Suggestions?

There are several arguments for a micronation. When u leave Christiania, the sign says "You are now entering EU". Furthermore Christiania has it own code of laws. (Luff) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Luphphe (talkcontribs) 08:02, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Of cource Christiania isn't any kind of nation (like the Vatican or so), but the inhabitants have used that phrase for shifting and various reasons. For instance did an exit sign state "You are now entering the EEC" (EEC is the former EU) , hence they ment Christiania wasn't a part of the EEC. It's not to take seriously. Boeing720 (talk) 18:03, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Not OR, sooner well-known in lagre parts of northern Europe[edit]

I think the OR flag could be removed. This is a famous/unfamous (whatever You prefer) part of Copenhagen. It's known in entire Scandinavia and in other countries as well. Boeing720 (talk) 17:57, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

I removed the OR template. I think the Refimprove template is enough in this case. It's not about whether Freetown Christiania is common knowledge or not, but about complying with Wikipedia's policy of verifiability. --Dodi 8238 (talk) 20:18, 28 July 2015 (UTC)


In contrast of lawfully information, you COTINUE to make public, information that you KNOW to be untrue. This is, at least in Denmark, NOT LEGAL, WHY???? are you doing this? Chritisnia IS a part of Denmark, Daniosh laws ARE APPLICABLE in this area. Chritisnaia IS NOT A FREE TOWN, THEY ARE GOVERNED BY DENMARK. This is quite culpable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:52, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

  • I don't think the article denies any of this. If you think it does, please point to a specific biased passage. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 19:00, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

" Its cannabis trade was tolerated by authorities until 2004." Especially this sentence conveys that Freetown Christiania is not governed by the same laws as the state of Denmar, that Christiania is a part of. Howver, I have to say, or admit,after a few read-throughs, it does not seem as "violent" or "crazy" as I read it first. While I am ready to admit that I maybe read it as "the devil reads the Bible", I still think that "tolerated" implies a degree of lawfull acceptance, that I in no way can recognize, being myself a citizen of Copenhagen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:04, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

  • No, the sentence doesn't say that Freetown Christiania wasn't governed by the same laws as the rest of Denmark; it says that the authorities were turning a blind eye to it. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 20:23, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

1971 article[edit]

The quoted 1971 is written in poor English. It is introduced with a citation to archives (currently fn 6) but ends with a 'citation needed' note. This seems self-contradictory: archives as a source of a direct quote should be totally acceptable. On another note, there is no indication of whether the original was in Danish or English. If it was in Danish, then a better translation is needed. Kdammers (talk) 07:50, 26 November 2016 (UTC)