Talk:City-state

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.

Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

Additional information and associated task forces:

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status:

Referencing and citation: not checked
Coverage and accuracy: not checked
Structure: not checked
Grammar: not checked
Supporting materials: not checked

To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call:

|B-Class-1=yes/no

|B-Class-2=yes/no

|B-Class-3=yes/no

|B-Class-4=yes/no

|B-Class-5=yes/no

This article is not currently associated with a task force. To tag it for one or more task forces, please add the task force codes from the template instructions to the template call.

1 Gibraltar
2 Zanzibar no city state
3 What about San Marino?
4 Merger proposal
5 City-states vs. citistates
6 Singapore, Monaco and Vatican City: cited as "arguably remain autonomous city-states" (in version as of 2 August 2007, 0240h)
7 What about Berlin?
8 "Singapore still has a significant portion of its territory unurbanised"?
9 more states
10 Berlin / Gibraltar

[edit] Gibraltar

Does Gibraltar qualify as a city-state? Chanheigeorge 04:20, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

No not really —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.26.18.56 (talk • contribs) 17:53, 4 April 2006

British overseas territory under sovereignty of UK Dainamo 00:25, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Zanzibar no city state

Zanzibar was no city state in the age of colonialism. It was the capital of an independent sultanate and regional power in the 19. century, and capital of a British Protectorate until independence 1964. --Kipala 08:59, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What about San Marino?

San Marino is pretty much a city state isn't it? Looks like it was forgotten here.

San Marino extends beyond a single urbanized area with distinct agricultural regions Dainamo 00:24, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Didn't classical city-states generally include surrounding agricultural regions, though? For example, classical Athens eventually ruled the entire peninsula of Attica. 74.224.167.240 (talk) 04:53, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Merger proposal

Citistates was recently added with content lifted from a source, and grossly undeveloped. The content would overlap with this article extensively.--Huaiwei 03:37, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] City-states vs. citistates

I'm not totally sure what a "citistate" is, and I may have butchered the concept in my re-write; it also probably needs some sort of cite or sourcing. It doesn't seem to be the same thing as a "city-state" in the sense of a classical Greek polis or a comparable entity (the city-states of Renaissance Italy or the city-states of the ancient Mayans). At any rate, discussions of Athens and Sparta--which are what spring to mind when one hears the term "city-state"--don't really have anything to do with "city regions" and "relocated urban business" and other modern buzzwords. 139.76.128.71 02:40, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Singapore, Monaco and Vatican City: cited as "arguably remain autonomous city-states" (in version as of 2 August 2007, 0240h)

I'm not sure that these countries' autonomy can be disputed. So why "arguably"? Does anyone have facts to back this claim that their sovereignty is controversial? I'm only fully sure of Singapore's independence so I do not want to make changes yet.Singyouranthem 13:43, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I am not involved in working on this article, but that change seems sensible to me as well - I can't think of any sense in which it is arguable that they are cities or that they are states.

--Tbook 18:28, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I think it's what's arguable is not their sovereignty but the fact that they still operate as city-states - Monaco and the Vatican City are both very much interdependent on Italy and France, respectively Brianski (talk) 16:28, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Sovereignty is pretty easy to identify, and is a straight-forward concept. Interdependence isn't (I think you mean "dependent" - interdependent suggests France relies on Monaco just as Monaco relies on France), and has nothing to do with either parties being cities, or states. Kransky (talk) 07:03, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What about Berlin?

During the Cold War, Berlin wasn't part of either German state, but a separate territory administered by the Allied countries. --67.101.223.69 (talk) 20:35, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Are you sure about that? Can you provide some facts to back that up? As I recall it, West Berlin was an exclave of West Germany, and East Berlin was clearly a part of East Germany. Brianski (talk) 16:30, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

At the end of World War II, Germany and Austria were divided into four occupied sectors - one American, one French, one British, and one Soviet. Berlin and Vienna were also divided into four occupied sectors. At the insistance of President Truman, Austria and Vienna were de-occupied relatively quickly after the war (since it was not Austria's fault that Germany forcibly annexed it in 1938). It is a question for debate whether the Soviets would or would not have agreed to a reunified Germany in 1949. In any case, France, UK and the US decided to join their three sections together as the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG). The Soviets having been left out of the deal (they said) reacted by created the German Democratic Republic (GDR). They then claimed that, as all of Berlin was surrounded by the GDR, it was now the property of the GDR and the Americans, British and French should leave. When they refused, the Soviets imposed a blocade. Washington, London and Paris responded with the Berlin Airlift. East Berlin was undoubtedly the capital of the GDR. West Berlin, however, was never formally incorporated into the FRG. Residents of West Berlin could come and go to and from West Germany as German citizens, but it was formally an international city.

But all of this historical information is utterly irrelevant. In contemporary Germany, the cities of Berlin, Bremen and Hamburg have the status of sovereign states within the German confederacy.

209.244.43.18 (talk) 05:21, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Are you sure about that? Can you provide some facts to back that up? As I recall it, West Berlin was an exclave of West Germany, and East Berlin was clearly a part of East Germany.. Sorry Brianski, but that is absolutely common knowledge and hardly requires any backup. You're right of course that East Berlin was de facto an integral part of East Germany (even the capital), and West Berlin was tightly integrated with West Germany, but the legal/political status was quite different. East Germany didn't honor this status at all (backed by the USSR), whereas West Germany did honor it. Most significantly, West Berliners weren't drafted into the Bundeswehr, because they weren't officially part of West Germany. They weren't allowed to directly vote in the West German elections, either; instead, the city's parliament sent delegates to the central parliament in Bonn. West German airlines couldn't fly to Berlin either, all air traffic between West Germany and West Berlin was carried out by the airlines of the occupying powers. Instead of "Deutsche Bundespost", stamps were labeled "Deutsche Bundespost Berlin" in West Berlin. So there can be really no discussion. However, I agree that all this is largely irrelevant to this article. --kate theobaldy (talk) 17:52, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Singapore still has a significant portion of its territory unurbanised"?

I thought Singapore was almost 100% urban. The whole place is a concrete jungle --Iamanigeeit (talk) 16:04, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Not quite. About 13% of Singapore is unurbanised. See 'land use' under Geography of Singapore. Kransky (talk) 16:24, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] more states

Today, Singapore, Monaco and the Vatican City are the only sovereign states which bear any resemblance to the classical definition of a city-state

Someone mentioned San Marino above, but what about Andorra and Liechtenstein? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.138.97.91 (talk) 10:44, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

The definition of a "city-state" isn't "a state the size of a city", but "a city that is an independent state". Andorra and Liechtenstein are not cities, i.e. a coherent urban agglomeration, and AFAIK the same can be said about San Marino. --kate theobaldy (talk) 18:19, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Berlin / Gibraltar

The article states that: Several sovereign countries have self-governing areas that are delineated around cities, such as Berlin in Germany, Macau and Hong Kong in China, the District of Columbia in the United States, the Brazilian Federal District in Brazil, the Mexican Federal District in Mexico, and Gibraltar. This enumeration isn't strictly wrong, but highly misleading. Gibraltar isn't generally considered as a city, and neither is it a self-governing area within a larger independent state. It is a dependent British overseas territory. So the sentence is dead wrong about Gibraltar, and Berlin is another odd one out. The other examples (Washington DC, Federal Districts in Brazil and Mexico, the special administrative regions of Hong Kong and Macau) all have some special status that puts them outside the regular administrative structure of the respective nation states. In other words, Washington DC is not a regular state of the USA. It enjoys a special status as the capital, just like Brasilia, Mexico City, or Canberra, Australia. The same can't be said about Berlin - Berlin is a regular German state like any other, except that its boundaries coincide with that of the city of Berlin. Unlike the article implies, Berlin does not have any special position due to its status as the capital. It is also not the only city-state among the states of the German federation - Bremen and Hamburg are genuine, traditional city-states, whereas Berlin had never been a city state until the division of Germany made West Berlin a de-facto city-state. Interestingly, when Berlin became capital of Germany, it was also supposed to be merged with the surrounding state of Brandenburg. Although this project was rejected in a referendum, it shows that Berlin's city-state status within Germany has nothing to do with it being the seat of government - unlike Washington, Mexico, Brasilia or Canberra. Finally, it is at least dubious to mention those along with Macau and Hong Kong which are city-states for quite different reasons. I'm going to modify this accordingly. --kate theobaldy (talk) 18:20, 21 April 2008 (UTC)