Please place new discussions at the bottom of the talk page.

This is the talk page for discussing Quasi-state and anything related to its purposes and tasks. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 3 months

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Politics Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. International relations Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations 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.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article contains a translation of protoestado from es.wikipedia.

Please add: Territory of the Shining Path JaxsonR (talk) 21:04, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The ambiguity of meaning of the "Achieved statehood" table columns and the resulting subjective judgment and WP:OR was discussed on this page in 2020 ("Vague table values"), but never resolved.

It can be resolved by adding this note to each "Achieved statehood" column header:

For any period that overlaps with the existence of the United Nations, this means full UN membership (viz. UN Charter Art 4). For earlier periods, and ambiguity should be to be clarified by table text or a footnote. The term "De facto" here indicates a stable entity meeting the Montevideo criteria, such as a republic within the Russian Federation, but not having full UN statehood for 1945+ states.)

Any values other than "Yes", "No", or "De facto" can be clarified with a note. Of course, text can also be added to supply information beyond Yes/No/De facto, e.g., "Constituent of Russian Federation".

The values (a) "Partial" and (b) "De jure" seem unhelpful. (a) Both the Sahrawi Republic and Ireland are currently listed as "Partial", even though their statuses are vastly different. Ireland's value could be changed from Partial to Yes, as statehood was achieved. Additional table text or a footnote could explain its borders. (b) The value "De jure" doesn't seem that useful for the reader. It suggests "Yes", while hinting at further important information not specified in the table entry. For example, the current value for the Isle of Mann, "De jure", doesn't seem to match it being a crown dependency.

Dotyoyo (talk) 18:40, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The primary issue with this article is that the table originally only included those entities that were explicitly described as “proto-states” or “quasi-states” in a footnote. There was one primary source that included a list of “proto-states” which was used to populate much of the table, as well as being used to sourced for the occasional caveat value. In the past four years, dozens of contributors have ignored this practice and unilaterally added unsourced or dubiously sourced additions based on their own subjective opinion of what qualifies. In addition, the primary source has been largely disregarded and removed from most entries overtime without reasons being offered other than WP:IDONTLIKEIT. The table has also been significantly altered in such a way that would’ve made partial autonomy values much less appropriate than in its original incarnation. --Katangais (talk) 17:10, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wa State is listed in both Secessionist, insurgent, and self-proclaimed state and constituent state, so which one should be removed? Breck0530 (talk) 22:26, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, @Breck0530: I've removed the (unreferenced) duplicate entry from the table of current, secessionist quasi-states. A related problem is that there is an artificial split between quasi-states that are "Constituent" and those that are "Secessionist, insurgent, and self-proclaimed autonomous". Note that a territory can proclaim its autonomy and become a constituent state. Ideally, these two types of tables could be combined for easier browsing.

For example, there are currently six quasi-states associated with Sudan, across three different tables. There might be a better means of presenting this information. Dotyoyo (talk) 00:38, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, Thanks! Breck0530 (talk) 01:09, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JaxsonR: Yesterday, on 2024-10-24, you added a quasi-state table entry for "Counter-Terrorism Strike Force administration in the Gaza Strip" (which I had deleted the day before with an explanatory edit description). As you have the WP:ONUS, could you please provide your rationale for what makes this a quasi-state?

Here's my thinking. The first paragraph of the lede makes it clear that quasi-states are less than full states, but the minimum criteria are fuzzy. The first ref (Grant & Barker) is quoted as saying that they have "many, but not all, the criteria of statehood ... which are nonetheless possessed of a measure of international personality". The 2025-09-22 Times of Israel ref you added says that Hossam al-Astal announced the formation of a militia that took over an "encampment" in a depopulated city with "dozens of families", and expected that 300-400 more people would arrive. Did these people ever arrive? Does this group, just announced, have many of the criteria of statehood? Does it have "international personality"? Did this group even survive the recent slaughter by Hamas that started during the current ceasefire?

The Griffiths ref has more specific criteria proto-state-hood, including (p. 52, 219) having 1000+ people and 100+ sq km of land, and being "organized administratively". In contrast, this militia sounds more like a small encampment serving as a refuge. Among his criteria for a secessionist movement (p. 50), Griffiths includes having a flag and making a claim to both a territory and a population, and that the secessionist group "must formally declare independence from its home state". This militia-with-refuge might be noteworthy and laudable, but it doesn't seem to rise to or even aspire to the level of being a quasi-state.

Lastly, please preview table edits you make to ensure that you don't mess up the table formatting. Thanks.

Dotyoyo (talk) 18:03, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

sorry, i understand im wrong and will revert it. JaxsonR (talk) 19:26, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. FWIW, I started out being skeptical of all the listed quasi-states that were named as rebel groups rather than as states. Some I've removed, while others I've kept. There's a gray are there. Please feel free to be WP:BOLD and do some more editing, even if some of those edits end up being reverted. Dotyoyo (talk) 03:21, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]