Talk:South African Republic (1914–15)

Does this article imply more substance than really existed?
As I understand it, the republic that Maritz proclaimed was essentially completely theoretical. There was no actual Provisional Government set up (other than the military commanders) and there was no substantial control of territory for substantial time. For this article to describe the republic as being "established" and "disestablished" seems to imply an existence that really wasn't there. And to name the capital as Pretoria, a city that was never under rebel control, seems definitely a problem.

I would suggest that this article simply be redirected to Maritz Rebellion, since it really doesn't contain any information that isn't already there. - htonl (talk) 17:53, 23 February 2013 (UTC)


 * XavierGreen (talk) 21:23, 6 April 2013 (UTC)As the creator of this article, i plan on expanding much further than what is here with much more information than what is included on the maritz rebellion page. There is actually a decent amount of regarding dipolomatic relations with Germany and the attempt by the Republic to get Germany to recognize it. As for its declared captial not being under its control, it is actually quite common for insurgent and separatist states to not be in control of portions of the area they claim including often times the city they declare as their capital.XavierGreen (talk) 21:23, 6 April 2013 (UTC)


 * As far as I can tell from the sources, the alleged republic never had a government besides the rebel generals, and never controlled territory except where their troops were present. It doesn't meet any of the criteria to be called a sovereign state, so if this article is to exist it needs to be clear on that point. But at the moment it really doesn't contain anything beyond what's already in the Maritz Rebellion article, so why not redirect it for now? When you come back to expand it later you can always undo the redirect then. - htonl (talk) 22:42, 6 April 2013 (UTC)