The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
At the very least, this seems to fail
WP:LISTN. "Micronation currency" doesn't appear to be a notable concept on its own, not to mention that most of what's here is sourced pretty dubiously (mostly primary). I can't imagine why there's any reason to collect this all into a separate list article rather than just leaving this information on the page of the individual entries if it's properly sourceable. –
Deacon Vorbis (
carbon •
videos)
19:32, 7 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment I'm inclined to delete per nom, but it seems like the info on this list, if properly sourced of course, could just become a column or two in
List of micronations—a list which does appear to pass
WP:LISTN, as the topic of micronations has been the subject of multiple journal articles and books according to GBooks and GScholar. However, the merge would be a real pain to execute, unless the Visual Editor is capable of copy-pasting feats with tables that I have hitherto not contemplated.
AleatoryPonderings (
talk)
20:19, 7 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete None of these are real currencies, for the most part they're jokes made up one day as part of their imaginary countries. Some contracted with printers or mints to make a small amount play money, perhaps to sell to people who collect tokens, but almost none are actually used in trade. Sources here are largely brief mentions in curiosity articles about the micronations, primary sources, or exonumia websites, with nothing on the topic as a whole. With respect to a merge, that would be reasonable were many of these actually used in these places, but most are tongue-in-cheek.
Reywas92Talk20:29, 7 September 2020 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
At the very least, this seems to fail
WP:LISTN. "Micronation currency" doesn't appear to be a notable concept on its own, not to mention that most of what's here is sourced pretty dubiously (mostly primary). I can't imagine why there's any reason to collect this all into a separate list article rather than just leaving this information on the page of the individual entries if it's properly sourceable. –
Deacon Vorbis (
carbon •
videos)
19:32, 7 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment I'm inclined to delete per nom, but it seems like the info on this list, if properly sourced of course, could just become a column or two in
List of micronations—a list which does appear to pass
WP:LISTN, as the topic of micronations has been the subject of multiple journal articles and books according to GBooks and GScholar. However, the merge would be a real pain to execute, unless the Visual Editor is capable of copy-pasting feats with tables that I have hitherto not contemplated.
AleatoryPonderings (
talk)
20:19, 7 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete None of these are real currencies, for the most part they're jokes made up one day as part of their imaginary countries. Some contracted with printers or mints to make a small amount play money, perhaps to sell to people who collect tokens, but almost none are actually used in trade. Sources here are largely brief mentions in curiosity articles about the micronations, primary sources, or exonumia websites, with nothing on the topic as a whole. With respect to a merge, that would be reasonable were many of these actually used in these places, but most are tongue-in-cheek.
Reywas92Talk20:29, 7 September 2020 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.