Forum:Territory application/Kinglavia as a separate territory

Forums → Territory application → Territory application/Kinglavia as a separate territory

Please fill in the information below to make a territory request.

	Territory ID and proposed name
	The Territory ID (from OpenGeofiction:Territories, e.g. AR123a) and proposed name of the country

I decided to file another petition to mark Kinglavia as a separate territory that is different from neighboring Kanglapo. If Kotel can be a separate territory, why not Kinglavia?

	Physical geography
	An overview of climate, topography and landscape of the country. It is advised to also create a sketch, you can add a link to this (hosted on imgur or similar)

Due to its location on the Dongket Ridge, Kinglavia consists predominantly of rugged mountains. It is connected to Bai and Kanglapo via three main roads. Much of the country is rural with settlements mainly along the main roads of the country.

	Human geography
	A brief description of the territory demographics, economic development, land occupation, infrastructure and mapping style

The main population centre is Kingketcheong, its capital, with other smaller villages along the main roads of the microstate. It is not meant to be well-developed although the principality in recent years is modernising.

	History & culture
	A brief description of the intended culture and language

Katayan nomadic tribes have settled on the ridge since 500 BC and facilitated trade between Kanglapo and Bai across the rugged terrain. As Suria claimed control of Kanglapo proper during the war against Bai, the Katayan rebels led by its self-proclaimed king fled to the mountains and managed to defend itself. Since the establishment of the principality, it remained isolated until the 20th century. Kanglapo has granted Kinglavia official independence in 1921, and the principality since established its own relations with other nations including the Bai Empire.

	Past mapping
	To support your request provide links to areas of OGF mapping which showcase your mapping skill. Mapping relevant to the requested theme & geography is especially useful
	The {{coord}} template can optionally be used to link to the OGF map - it results in a nice formatted link. Or you can paste in a URL.

• <nowiki> Kinglavia proper

	Username & date
	Sign and date the application by typing four tildes like this: ~~~~

Zhenkang (talk) 13:25, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

	Discussion
	Discussion for clarification & decision

I put this application up again in lieu of the deletion notice. I understand for meta administrative purposes, Kinglavia is admin-level=3 on the map as part of AR915, but I need to emphasise that Kinglavia in all other aspects is independent of Kanglapo. It also added problems when I once tried to add Kinglavia to the Assembly of Nations list on the grounds that it's not "an independent nation". If non-indepedent states are not allowed on the membership list, then what about Inxigne and Kotel, who are in "free association" with Tigeria which manages their diplomatic relations? Kinglavia is not subordinate to the Kanglapolish government and conducts its own affairs with its own separate government ruled by a monarch. Like, would you consider Andorra part of Spain? Or the Vatican as part of Italy?

I hope you can consider making Kinglavia a separate territory to reduce any further confusion. I believe, as Kinglavia is well-developed enough at this point, it should be considered a separate territory. Zhenkang (talk) 13:25, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Zhenkang has my support in this case, I believe that if Kinglavia cannot be mapped as an independent nation, so shouldn't Kotel, Inxigne, Lonowai or even Arecales (which for some reason are admin_level=2). Let's treat people equally and not choose, either all of those aforementioned places get their status lowered to admin_level=3 and go into their respective owner's relations, or let Kinglavia become an independent territory. Mie (talk) 13:35, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

To be clear, territory application is not a popularity contest, nor is it tied to prior decisions as some sort of precedent.

The different regional admins apply slightly different policies, in an attempt to best manage and guide the continent toward some level of cohesiveness. In the early OGF days there was total freedom to split territories, that is not the case now, and it hasn't been the case for a very long time.

Where there is a desire to split off a section of territory, and take it in a different direction, then that should be proposed first and consensus reached. It's not retroactive, and it's not something which should be further confused by taking territory from a purple territory too.

The previous acceptance of change as a admin level 3 body was a compromise, rather than rejecting and forcing the change to be undone. That position has not changed.

Back in the real-world there are many examples of "countries" which think they are, operate de facto as, but are not recognised as such. /wangi (talk) 15:31, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Removing wiki presence in opposition to admin wiki policies —Unsigned comment by Zhenkang (talk).

	Territory application closed
	Closing. Our policies are clear regarding which wiki articles can be created, however given the volunteer nature of our roles, dealing with pages which do not meet the criteria isn't always immediate. Territories are applied for, in advance, and not retroactively. Where the application is then not approved, you should not continue regardless to create a wiki article as if it had been successful. Thanks/wangi (talk) 08:07, 11 April 2024 (UTC)