This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics 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.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Micronations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Micronations 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.MicronationsWikipedia:WikiProject MicronationsTemplate:WikiProject MicronationsMicronations articles
It seems to me that the so-called "Independent State of Aramoana" and "Aramoana" are one and the same thing. This article is also on the short side. However, my merge was reverted. This is the last edit before the reversion. Would any interested editors please say if they prefer seperate articles or the merged version, and why? Thanks. --kingboyk 23:28, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Independent State of Aramoana is about a micronation. Aramoana is about a town. 2 different subjects. 2 different articles. Editors should note that kingboyk is currently engaged in a campaign to redefine the term "micronation" in a way that is unsupported by reference sources or established consensus, and delete content about micronations from WP. He has nominated a large number of articles on this subject for deletion in the past 72 hours, including articles which have survived multiple prior deletion attempts. --Gene_poole 23:35, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The town claimed independence for a while, but it's still the same town! Why does it need 2 articles?! Because it issued some stamps?
Editors should note that imho the above personal attack (par for the course) should be disregarded, and the real important question focussed on: 1 merged article or 2, and why? --kingboyk 23:40, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Allow me to repeat: 2 separate entities. 2 separate articles. The micronation and town are 2 distinct things. The micronation no longer exists. The town does. --Gene_poole 23:44, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There's no reason to needlessly separate small articles like this. Even when things are arguably distinct we frequently merge (one common example is merging authors with their books if they only wrote one major work). Organizational decisions are made for navigational, maintenance and ease of readers all of which would support merging. JoshuaZ 00:55, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, merge is good. This is clearly a single concept. Guy (Help!) 06:55, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I concur with JzG. It's part of the history of the town. >Radiant< 09:22, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I see the argument for retaining the separate article on the micronation, but per the recent AfD I'm going to merge this into Aramoana. Baileypalblue (talk) 19:17, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
