User talk:Pacifica

Thank you for opening the debate. Here are my first comments regarding the Empire of Pacifica part of the article:
 * "non-territorial Sovereign State" is highly debatable. This should be rephrased or placed in another paragraph with an explanation why Pacifica considers itself as such.


 * why is it debatable? it is a Sovereign State according to the Montevideo Convention of 1933 and based on the same principle used for recognition of the Soverignity of the Order of Malta by the UN. It is non.territorial because we currentlly hold no territory


 * Regarding the other paragraph, I would prefer the current wording found at Pacifica: "Considered as a micronation the Empire of Pacifica claims to be a "State of the World seeking recognition from the International Community"." which is more NPOV, since it presents two conflicting views. Still, "Considered as a micronation" is not perfect, since it does not explain who consider it as such.


 * Actually I agree in a way with that....


 * I have problems with the table: such tables are used for countries, provinces... Using such a table for the "Empire of Pacifica" would be misleading, in my opinion, making it look like a country or a province.


 * If I am not mistaken I saw that also on an micronational topic, but that can go


 * could you help me to create a way of displaing (at least some of) that information.


 * I would also rather place this content in a separate "Empire of Pacifica"


 * Completally agree but with one condition the PAcifica Radio topic is also placed on a separate "Pacifica Radio" and both redirects be placed on the Pacifica Topic

article, as has been suggested in Talk:Pacifica. olivier 16:51 Jan 19, 2003 (UTC)

some partes are replied on the message

I will also be cunsulting with Eduardo (the Emperor) to prepare a diferent text (more NOPV)

Diana Couto

-

The Montevideo Convention of 1933 says:
 * The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: (a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; (c) government; and (d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.

At the same time, you say that you have no territory: so your assertion of statehood fails on this point alone.

--- Actually that point is on the basis of the discussion about Recognition of the Order of Malta by the UN

The Order of Malta also doesn't hold any territory but it is considered Sovereign, Soverign over there Memberes.

We are Sovereign over our citizens.

We, as the Order of Malta, complie with all points of Article 3 except point (b) wish is not an obstruction due to late jurisprudence

Diana Couto P.S. don't forget to signe your posts


 * It looks like your knowledge of the definition of statehood could be valuably added to articles like Sovereign Military Order of Malta and Montevideo Convention and probably others. If you decide to edit these articles, please remember the NPOV rule! NB: signing with your Wikipedia user name is also useful... olivier 19:34 Jan 19, 2003 (UTC)


 * Actually my knolage comes form a study made by Eduardo de Lagrenge on Micronations and MicroStates for a conference held at the Catolic University of Porto on the Year 2000 about the legality of the new self proclaimed nations If you wish I could try to translate it into english for publiction here (I can talk to the author to solve the copyright issue)

Diana Couto


 * I do not wish anything. It is up to you to decide if you want to make contributions to Wikipedia. olivier 20:48 Jan 19, 2003 (UTC)

Oliver have a look at the text again... this one was made by me and Eduardo based upon the topics of Hutt Rivver Province, Sealand and Atlantium (I belive it is NOPV but please let me know)

Diana Couto

Image copyrights
Thanks for uploading Image:Pacifica coa.jpg. I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use if you release it under the GFDL, or  if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much,   &mdash; Edwin Stearns | Talk 19:10, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Pacifica flag.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Pacifica flag.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you. —MetsBot 18:43, 9 December 2006 (UTC) Zscout370 (Sound Off) 30 June 2005 04:46 (UTC)