Talk:Asgardia

About concerns of their citizens on the legitimacy of the new Constitution

I have been reading the forums of this self called nation and there are some posts (example: https://asgardia.space/en/forum/forum/general-discussion-14/topic/petition-cancel-of-the-current-vote-and-creating-of-a-new-craft-of-the-consititution-6430/) about the Constitution adoption process was flawed or biased towards the 'yes' option due to not having the possibility to vote against the draft and about the suddenly short term of the vote (24 hours), according to an user there, not enought to review the entire Constitution draft, among other problems. Since I could not find sources about this issue, I will not add this information, but my ask here is if someone could find a source about this. --Zerabat (talk) 13:15, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Language? Lingvo?

And the official language will be...? Kaj la oficiala lingvo estos...? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:E34:EE56:A840:8845:4985:C547:DA15 (talk) 18:15, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Asgardia seems to not accept Esperanto, Scots or Ulster Scots as languages. These being languages I speak. Asgardia ŝajne ne akceptas kiel ligvoj, Esperanton, la Skotan aŭ la Usteran Skotan, malagraŭ ke mi povas paroliu tiujn ĉijn lingvojn krome la anglan... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.156.199.250 (talk) 15:37, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Sourcing

The majority of the article was sourced to Asgardia: this is obviously not good. I'm in the process of changing it to reflect what RS say about it. Bromley86 (talk) 13:02, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Done. Bromley86 (talk) 11:44, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

@Bromley86: You have made an almost complete re-write/re-order of the page without any consultation on the talk page. I'm not saying that what you have done is 'bad' and the revised content seems tight, however, it would have been a big courtesy to other active editors to suggest your edits or basic plan here first. Some of the content you removed, particularly details of the draft constitution and governance of the inititative are available from a non-primary sources but you have removed them in their entirety. I'm more of an inclusionist personally and think it better to hunt for references rather than delete, which is why I tagged the article with ref tags and non-primary tags in the first place, not so that someone would delete the non-referenced content. Mountain^{cirque · Join WikiProject Karate?} 11:49, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Mountaincirque. I had to read, review & summarise something like 20 sources to come up with something that reflected what the published sources say. To do that while trying to engage with supporters of a micronation would be an exercise in futility, IMO. Your tags didn't influence me either way: I came here via a list of micronations, and immediately noticed almost zero RS were being used, and that the article included a lot of irrelevancies, from the POV of an encyclopedia.

If there's something that you want to add back that you can source to an RS, then you'll get no objection from me. I had a quick look again at the version prior to my arrival and I couldn't see the non-primary sources that you mentioned regarding the constitution. Bromley86 (talk) 12:08, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Fair point, some of the editors do seem to be supporters and I have been trying my best to make the article factual rather than presenting the 'dream of Asgardia'...e.g. removing the 'currency' from the infobox multiple times. I'm happy with the article in general thanks to your rework and may add information on constitutional developments in due course when decent sources are available. Mountain^{cirque · Join the Karate Task Force?} 12:58, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Languages

@Salvabl. WP reflects what WP:RS say, and there's no reliable source to support inclusion of the languages. Ditto anthem. So we don't include. Asgardia may be more serious than the average micronation, but it's still a subject that's likely to be puffed up by supporters beyond what an encyclopaedia should contain. Bromley86 (talk) 10:31, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

I should also say that the general convention with micronations has been to allow flags/mottos/coats of arms, so I'll leave those. Anything else is better dealt with on their website.
I'll also revert the Asgardia-1 image as I couldn't find confirmation that it's CC. If you can point it out to me, that'd be a good addition to the article. Bromley86 (talk) 10:34, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 5 August 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: move to Asgardia. Spellcast (talk) 19:05, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

---

Asgardia (nation) → Asgardia (micronation) – This is a micronation, clearly not a nation state according to any RS, though it indeed aspires to become the latter. Pharos (talk) 20:53, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

• Pharos, I am opposed to changing the name of the article to "Asgardia (micronation)". The constitution of Asgardia reads, in part, "The terms 'Space Kingdom of Asgardia' and 'Asgardia' are synonymous". I therefore believe that it would be appropriate to change the name of the article to "Space Kingdom of Asgardia". Using that name, the status of Asgardia could change from "micronation" to "nation" without affecting the title of the article. Scott Gregory Beach (talk) 02:03, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
• Support as Wirtland (micronation), good call. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:55, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
• Support It is a proposed nation state, not yet a nation, so the current title is simply factually incorrect. I also object to the proposed presence of the term "kingdom" in the title of this article, and more generally in the constitution of Asgardia itself, since it clearly isn't a monarchy by any stretch of the imagination - and shouldn't be since monarchy is largely a relic of feudalism with no governmental legitimacy. Famousdog (woof)(grrr) 10:27, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
• Support either 'Asgardia (micronation)' or 'Space Kingdom of Asgardia' as both make clear that this is a fantasy and not a real nation. Celia Homeford (talk) 14:41, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
• Inquiry: Will the name of the article titled "Nation of Celestial Space" be changed to "Nation of Celestial Space (micronation)"? Scott Gregory Beach (talk) 16:28, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
  • No need since there is no other article from which it requires disambiguation. Station1 (talk) 17:56, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
• Move to Asgardia per WP:PRECISE. Like Nation of Celestial Space, there is no other article titled Asgardia. Station1 (talk) 17:56, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
• Move to Asgardia per User:Station1._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 20:12, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
• Support. The Asgardia DAB page does seem appropriate, and "nation" appears inaccurate. – Broccoli & Coffee ^{(Oh hai)} 20:29, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
• Move to Asgardia per User:Station1. Scott Gregory Beach (talk) 16:32, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
• Support. Wikipedia should show facts, and despite this entity claims itself being a nation Wikipedia shouldn't take it as nation on that basis but with reliable independent sources if those exist instead. --Zerabat (talk) 22:14, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
• Nation. According to Wikipedia's "Nation" article, nation should "Not to be confused with State (polity), Nation state, or Country".

Asgardia is not a nation state but it is a nation.

"A nation is a soul, a spiritual principle." Ernest Renan's What is a Nation? (1882)

The nation has been described by Benedict Anderson as an "imagined community" and by Paul James as an "abstract community". It is an imagined community in the sense that the material conditions exist for imagining extended and shared connections. It is an abstract community in the sense that it is objectively impersonal, even if each individual in the nation experiences him or herself as subjectively part of an embodied unity with others.

The Internet provides the "material conditions" that allow Asgardians to imagine that they are "subjectively part of an embodied unity with others". Asgardians are connected to each other by their websites (Asgardia.space and Asgardia.com) and they are united by their supreme value; "Asgardia’s absolute supreme value is humanity striving into the infinite future, the infinite Universe, and infinite new Universes".

Asgardia has not established diplomatic relations with Monaco, Andorra, the Holy See or any other nation state. Asgardia has not yet been admitted to the membership of the United Nations. Asgardia is nevertheless as "nation" and its nationhood should be acknowledged by Wikipedia. Scott Gregory Beach (talk) 22:18, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Sources on controversies linked to Asgardia and its founder

• Rollet, Rollet (April 6, 2018). "The Mostly Online 'Space Kingdom' of Asgardia Attempts Democracy". Gizmodo.
• "The space kingdom of Asgardia How a Russian defense industry wiz built humanity's first 'extraterrestrial state'". Meduza. January 23, 2018.

--Zerabat (talk) 23:36, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

I feel it necessary to introduce a "controversy" section to the article. --User:Tevenik — Preceding undated comment added 13:26, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Regarding 'controversies' sections, they are generally discouraged, per WP:CRITS, and any valid critical content should be incorporated into relevant sections in the main body of the article. And please read Wikipedia:Reliable sources: you cannot, for example cite an article dated Sept 7 2022 for a statement that something occurred a week later. Likewise, you cannot cite a 2018 article for a statement that the recent Russian invasion of Ukraine has led to controversies. I am going to revert your recent edits, and ask that you find sources that directly support the claims being made, and then post them here for discussion. AndyTheGrump (talk) 13:42, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

If the satellite is destroyed, then this wikipedia article is currently giving incorrect information. And the controversy surrounding the founder's link to Russian Defense is completely ignored in this article, despite being widely reported; it gives the impression that there are editors from the Asgardia project attempting to conceal this information from wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tevenik (talk • contribs) 14:02, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Please read again what I wrote. We need sources that directly support content. Not sources written earlier than the events they are supposed to be supporting. If something has been 'widely reported', such sources shouldn't be hard to find. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:15, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Asgardia flag.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:37, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

2% of Earth population?

What does this sentence actually mean? "Second, the Lunar, which will be an exclusive currency just for the citizens of Asgardia, 2% of the Earth's population." By their own count, their are 290,000 'citizens' of Asgardia. That's less than 0.005% of the Earth's population. Or are they aiming for 2% of the Earth's population to be 'citizens' at some future date?

Good question/catch. That seems to have been copied from this speech. I've removed the "2% of the Earth's population" as it obviously doesn't make sense. The editor who added it has been blocked so we can't ask for clarification. Some of their edit also appears to violate copyright, I need to look at more in depth. Schazjmd (talk) 22:44, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Hey, I found out where the 2% is coming from: their target population size. In January 2019, Asgardia released a booklet introducing key concepts of the Nation among which the goal structure of the Nation aiming to embrace a total population of 2% of the total Earth inhabitants, a mere 150,000,000 (150 million!) people. (quoted from The Population Hierarchy in Asgardia) Schazjmd (talk) 22:48, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Removal of WP:OR/WP:SYNTH

I've removed the following paragraph from the article, as it is speculative original research and synthesis of how current laws might apply to Asgardia, with no secondary sources that actually talk about Asgardia's legal status. Copying it here in case anyone wants to use any of it for a more appropriate, sourced paragraph: Schazjmd (talk) 23:04, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

The State of Nevada has adopted the Uniform Law Commission's "Revised Uniform Unincorporated Nonprofit Association Act of 2008." If Asgardia conducted its activities in the State of Nevada, Asgardia would be treated by that state as an "unincorporated nonprofit association" and as "a legal entity distinct from its members and managers." In other jurisdictions, Asgardia might or might not be treated as a legal entity; i.e., an entity that has the capacity to purchase, hold, and sell real property and personal property, and the power to enter into contracts, and the power to petition a court of law.

References