Talk:World Passport

message: Over the last year and a half, I don't know how many times I have had to argue my point here. One editor feels I am within "right" and then the next not, to have my link (link removed it links to an adult site) and description of the "world passport project" under the world passport page of Wikipedia.
My reasoning is:
If World Passport Authority can link under this topic, then so can anyone who issues world passports under whatever premise they wish: Be it pseudo-official; art-based or concrete philosophical discussion.
Just because the word "authority" is in World Passport Authority's title doesn't mean they are a real authority. Just because the booklet that they issue, looks like an official document doesn't mean it is. They scam people to pay an amount of money for something that doesn't actually exist. More details are seen below in my last discussion on this page.
A World Passport is a conceptual idea and doesn't belong to any one organisation. FYI: Another artist who discusses this is Tom Muller: http://www.galeriedusseldorf.com.au/GDArtists/Mueller/TMHomoGlobus02.html. And therefore I and anyone else should also be able to link information about this concept too. In my case, the two websites are about the same issue: a world passport. The only difference is that I, Sonya Spry; have a completely different view about how to bring the concept and topic of a world passport to the forefront than the founder of http://www.worldservice.org, Garry Davis. World Passport Authority already has a page to itself, since it is a business. It cannot however, have "sole ownership" to the concept of nor the word: world passport.  Tourdottk (talk) 17:30, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is about a particular artifact, not a concept. Even if the proposed content met the required criteria for inclusion in the project, it would more correctly belong in a separate article, however named. RashersTierney (talk) 21:37, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed the article dealing with the general concept would be at World passport. Rich Farmbrough, 10:34, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

text: I disagree with your interpretation. Whether you accept the legitimacy of nation states or not is wholly your decision. The existence of national borders and the rights of sovereign states to control who may penetrate those borders, however, are indisputably observable phenomena in the world. The document, along with fantasy birth certificates etc, is marketed as a travel document and does not feature a disclaimer that it is not a real travel document. For these reasons, I do not feel that the article is in any way biased. --Île flottante (talk) 06:14, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

text: I have therefore proposed the removal of that table further down on the talk page. --Île flottante (talk) 06:15, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: '''What  is a World Passport?'''

message: Please be aware, the world passport is NOT a government issued passport and NOT accepted by Notary Public.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.118.100.117 (talk) 00:44, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Be aware

message: Is this passport accepted by USA and EU?
Unsolicited 14:32, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Its not accepted by anyone. Spartaz 14:27, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For immigration purposes, probably no longer accepted. Just FYI, by practice, it is accepted as identity document such as in post offices or banks of some countries (especially, if the bank is not required to collect nationality information).119.104.106.131 (talk) 08:07, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Accepted by?

message: To check into a hotel...
To do banking transactions, after changing to use this form of ID...
As ID to get a mobile phone in repressive regimes, (Greece)...
To buy a car, a boat, and (hopefully) some land...
Sure to find more uses soon, other than travel
Maybe we should have a (talk/article?) section for (non-state) services that do and do not recognise it?
Notawsabod (talk) 13:19, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Where to use it?

message: March 19, 2010: again and again: Just wondering what the reasoning is behind deleting the link to www.worldpassport.tk  from the page titled "world passport" on wikipedia? As far as I can tell, a world passport is not an internationally recognised official document and therefore the 'title and concept' cannot be claimed by any one individual nor organisation. A World Passport remains a conceptual idea.
While I have read the wikipedia guidelines and I understand that it is not a publisher of individual thought, I am then confused as to why the World Service Authority can voice their philosophical viewpoint and mislead potential readers/purchasers into believing in the power of a document that does not give any true identity nor real access at worldwide borders. (except of course in a couple of extremely rare, or "case-by-case" as they would like to put it, circumstances).
You could also argue that the www.worldpassport.tk link leads to a website, but it was placed in the same external link section as the link to the World Service Authority. While the artist's website only requires thoughtful discussion, which generates a world-wide point of view on the ideology behind the concept of a world passport, the World Service Authority charges a fee for all their so-called "world-wide" documents: World Citizen Card: registration fee is $30 plus $30 annual assessment. World Passort: 3 years: $45. 5 years: $75 8 years: $100. World Donor Passport: with special cover added is issued gratis to contributors for $400 or more to the World Refugee Fund. (btw: connected directly to the World Service Authority) World Identity Card: $20 World Birth Certificate: $20 World Marriage Certificate (only for registered World Citizens): $30. For the World Political Asylum Card (only for registered World Citizens): $10. For the World Press Card (only for members of the World Media Association): $30 (2 year membership fee). Shipping and handling fees are extra (of course!)
Now if one would want to get pedantic about the interpretation of what is and what isn't encyclopaedic content, then I really have to argue that while the World Service Authority appears to have an official website and official authority it is no more than a scam to take money out of the hands of the desperate. And if there is anyone that knows about how desperate they are, it is myself. I have read and answered so many requests from those who actually believe that there is the possibility of buying your way out of an impossible situation.
So, if you delete the link www.worldpassport .tk, then the World Service Authority link should be removed as well. It is only a wonderful concept put into the hands of a true misleader, and personally I believe, all information about this organisation should be taken from wikipedia. It only gives it a more "true" status.
Voicing an artists' view, equal rights of discussion and thought and speaking up for those without the freedom to travel thoughout our world.
Wikipedia, please be consistent, but most of all be responsible!
Kind regards
Sonya Spry www.tour.tk | what a wonderful world tour | travelling the world on bicycle since 2006 www.sonali.tk | justifiable web design www.underthesamesky.net | an artist's take on art www.worldpassport.tk | an artist's view on the topic of the world passport  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.134.26.152 (talk) 15:48, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: References for work in progress

message: Can anyone give me the list of countries that accept the world passport issued by WSA. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tbaba (talk • contribs) 16:53, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Their website has a list of 150 + countries that have accepted it at least once (including most countries that you could think of) but only six (apparently since reduced) that do so as a matter of policy. In other words, if you catch some customs guy sleeping on the job, you might get a visa--on the same principle that some people have managed to travel on passports issued by the United Federation of Planets--but don't count on it.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi J. Delanoy
Have no idea if I am in the right section or not???
But anyway...
Just wondering what the reasoning is behind deleting the link to www.worldpassport.tk from the page titled "world passport" on wikipedia? As far as I can tell, a world passport is not yet an internationally recognised official document and therefore the 'title and concept' cannot be claimed by any one individual nor organisation. A World Passport remains a conceptual idea.
While I have read the wikipedia guidelines and I understand that it is not a publisher of individual thought, I am then confused as to why the World Service Authority can voice their philosophical viewpoint and mislead potential readers/purchasers into believing in the power of a document that does not give any true identity nor real access at worldwide borders. (except of course in a couple of extremely rare, or "case-by-case" as they would like to put it, circumstances).
You could also argue that the www.worldpassport.tk link leads to a website, but it was placed in the same external link section as the link to the World Service Authority. While the artist's website only requires thoughtful discussion, which generates a world-wide point of view on the ideology behind the concept of a world passport, the World Service Authority charges a fee for all their so-called "world-wide" documents: 
World Citizen Card: registration fee is $30 plus $30 annual assessment.
World Passort: 3 years: $45. 5 years: $75 8 years: $100.
World Donor Passport: with special cover added is issued gratis to contributors for $400 or more to the World Refugee Fund. (btw: connected directly to the World Service Authority)
World Identity Card: $20
World Birth Certificate: $20
World Marriage Certificate (only for registered World Citizens): $30.
For the World Political Asylum Card (only for registered World Citizens): $10.
For the World Press Card (only for members of the World Media Association): $30 (2 year membership fee).
Shipping and handling fees are extra (of course!)''
Now if one would want to get pedantic about the interpretation of what is and what isn't encyclopaedic content, then I really have to argue that while the World Service Authority appears to have an official website and official authority it is no more than a scam to take money out of the hands of the desperate. And if there is anyone that knows about how desperate they are, it is myself. I have read and answered so many requests from those who actually believe that there is the possibility of buying your way out of an impossible situation.
So, if you delete the link www.worldpassport .tk, then the World Service Authority link should be removed as well. It is only a wonderful concept put into the hands of a true misleader, and personally I believe, all information about this organisation should be taken from wikipedia. It only gives it a more "true" status. 
Voicing an artists' view, equal rights of discussion and thought and speaking up for those without the freedom to travel thoughout our world.
Wikipedia, please be consistent, but most of all be responsible!
Kind regards
Sonya Spry
www.tour.tk | what a wonderful world tour | travelling the world on bicycle since 2006
www.sonali.tk | justifiable web design
www.underthesamesky.net | an artist's take on art
www.worldpassport.tk | an artist's view on the topic of the world passport
189.182.236.236 (talk) 19:41, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does any country accept the world passport 

message: It might be worth mentioning that citizen of Georgia tried to enter Latvia with World Passport at 27. July. He was arrested. Interestingly - he also had an valid Georgian passport with him. Later he asked for political asylum. 
http://www.baltic-course.com/eng/baltic_states_cis/?doc=43953  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.110.115.79 (talk) 22:50, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Georgian citizen tries to enter Latvia with World Passport 

message: Why was this edit removed as 'promotional material'? The link seems genuine, and Julian Assange was issued a  world passport on Garry Davis' initiative, just as with Jawaharlal Nehru, the Dalai Lama and others.
http://www.expertclick.com/NRWire/Releasedetails.aspx?id=41434  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.229.192.58 (talk) 15:46, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Julian Assange honorary World Passport 

message: This section is essentially a collection of unverifiable incidents upon which, at some point over the past fifty or so years, an immigration official has stamped a so called World Passport. It is not based on reliable sources of information such as individual countries' immigration agencies' websites. I suggest that the table be removed as it may mislead a reader into believing that the document is valid for those countries. --Île flottante (talk) 06:10, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Accepted by" section 

message: I am nominating this article for deletion because the author seems to be using Wikipedia to advance a personal agenda. 
The author appears to be engaging in a negative publicity campaign against the World Passport and the World Service Authority (the nonprofit organization that issues the document).
The author of this article is using his creative writing licence in a very liberal manner. 
The media articles and references the author uses to support his claims about the  World Passport being nothing more than a  "fantasy travel document" is also incredibly biased and opinionated. 
Surely, the author could have chosen better sources of information about the World Passport for this article.  There are plenty of news articles and media references about the World Passport on the World Wide Web.  Not of all the articles put this document in a negative light.
I have a World Passport.  I do not work or volunteer for the organization that issues this document.  The author of this article is not the voice of general consensus. The author does not speak for the global population. 
I have a Bachelor of Science degree in criminal Justice (including constitutional law classes). I have been employed as a legal investigator for government agencies and major law firms for more than twenty-five years (I've also investigated quite a few fraud cases). I'd like to know what  qualifications and credentials the author possesses, which (he believes) gives him superior authority (over everyone else) to maintain this biased article on Wikipedia in it's current form?
The World Passport has had defacto acceptance by many nations on several occasions.  Any nation can chose to accept or reject the World Passport at their own discretion.  Therefore, the author's arguments are untrue and invalid. 
The opening sentence in this article is unnecessarily misleading.  It conveys a negative view of the "World Passport".  The use of the phrase "fantasy travel document" is biased and opinionated.  The author of this article could have chosen to use more appropriate and accurate descriptive terminology in it.
Secondly, The World Service Authority does not "sell" World Passports. The World Service Authority is a 501c3 organization. Meaning, they do not make a profit. I'm sure any money received goes towards the cost of producing the World Passport and other administrative expenses.
The author is acting maliciously by maintaining this article in it's current form.  I'm sure the language contained in this article is causing substantial damage to the operation of this lawfully recognized nonprofit organization.  
User:Davidlubimoff (User talk:Davidlubimoff)
:Hi thanks for your input. Given that no country has a de facto or de jure policy of accepting this document when it is presented at international borders, this document cannot reasonably be considered to belong to the same category of documents that are accepted by nearly every immigration authority in the world, i.e. actual passports. Wikipedia is not an advertising platform, and consequently articles are not written with the goal of promoting things in a positive light, rather articles are written in such a manner as to present information clearly and accurately. I disagree with you that describing the World Passport as a fantasy travel document is biased. A fantasy travel document is a document issued by a person or organisation lacking the normal authority to issue passports; authorities able to issue passports are, generally speaking, international organisations or immigration authorities. Your argument about WSA being a non-profit and the the selling of World Passports brining in revenue to support the production of the aforementioned is bizarre and doesn't lead to a conclusion. Île flottante (talk) 07:44, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: User:Davidlubimoff, if you have reliable sources that support some of your claims, such as the WSA not selling World Passports, you are at liberty to edit the article as you work with others to reach consensus. Academic Challenger (talk) 07:50, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

text: Again, I'm afraid this argument also isn't very logical. The World Passport is sold for a fee, that fee is received by WSA and it is therefore profit derived from that sale. In legal terminology, the World Passport and the fee paid for it are both parties' considerations for the contract of sale between WSA and the purchasing party. Whether or not WSA is profitable is dependant on how many World Passports they manage to sell, but this is ultimately irrelevant to the fact that World Passports are indeed sold. --Île flottante (talk) 10:27, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

text: This is really getting ridiculous. We are getting off on a tangent here about whether they are sold or not, but that's getting away from the fact that they are NOT passports anyway. They are NOT officially issued as a normal passport would be, and have NO official standing.--Dmol (talk) 05:44, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  It doesn't matter if it's being sold for profit. Charities can still sell things, be that for profit or not. The DVLA analogy is irrelevant, because the former is a government agency charging a fee to issue a an official government document, whereas WSA is an organisation charing a fee for a produce they've produced.Île flottante (talk) 14:11, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

text: The World Passport is a de facto travel document of limited use.  It is provided for a fee by the World Service Authority, a non-profit organization founded by Garry Davis in 1954.
This would address the issue that it is not a de jure passport, it is not used very widely, and it is (possibly) not "sold" according to the legal definition. Hulten (talk) 13:18, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

text: Hi, I oppose this change. The World Passport is not a de facto travel document; it is not widely accepted and no state officially accepts it, therefore it cannot be said to fulfil the function of a travel document. I disagree with your contention that it is not sold. A contact of sale is concluded between the seller and the purchaser, therefore making 'sell' the appropriate verb. Île flottante (talk) 21:26, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I also oppose this change. It is not a travel document, de facto or otherwise.  The "fantasy passport" designation is well referenced and long-standing. Have a look at the talk page, and the edit history, and you will see a long list of single-use accounts trying to change this fact.--Dmol (talk) 09:05, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article contains biased, opinionated, inaccurate and intentionally misleading information  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on World Passport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110725080304/http://www.usembassy-israel.org.il/publish/press/state/archive/march/sd3_3-25.htm to http://www.usembassy-israel.org.il/publish/press/state/archive/march/sd3_3-25.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110807155803/http://www.crb.homeoffice.gov.uk/pdf/dn_may_09.pdf to http://www.crb.homeoffice.gov.uk/pdf/dn_may_09.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090720042243/http://www.gov.im/infocentre/archived_releases/PR_fsc_01/Passport.html to http://www.gov.im/infocentre/archived_releases/PR_fsc_01/Passport.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160118021541/http://bigstory.ap.org/article/929caf1952904b7fb94ea28f8ff65453/south-africa-us-rapper-mos-def-arrested-false-passport to http://bigstory.ap.org/article/929caf1952904b7fb94ea28f8ff65453/south-africa-us-rapper-mos-def-arrested-false-passport
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100206221359/http://www.romingerlegal.com/tenthcircuit/10th_circuit/99-1334.htm to http://www.romingerlegal.com/tenthcircuit/10th_circuit/99-1334.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:25, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I respect Dmol and know he is trying to do the right thing, but I have a question for him and the community.
Why was an edit I made deleted when it improved the article with factual information?  Here are the three paragraphs to replace the first sentence:
World Passports are issued by the World Service Authority (WSA) a non-profit organization in Washington DC.  The passport states that it is issued  pursuant to Article 13:2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights [1]: "Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country."[2] The World Service Authority was founded by Garry Davis[3] in 1954.[4] 
Although the WSA displays copies of VISA entry and exit stamps by 187 countries,[5] such recognition is inconsistent and many of the same countries frequently reject it. The European Council has classified it under its category "fantasy documents"[6] 
Issuance of passports by non-state agencies dates back to 1922, when Fridtjof Nansen launched the Nansen Passport which was issued to stateless refugees. Adopted by the League of Nations, his passport was eventually recognized by over 50 governments.[7]
Since each of these statements are documented and since they include Dmol’s concern that the word “fantasy” be mentioned, why were they deleted and replace with an opinion? 
Here's what was referenced in the citation section: 
1. World Passport page 2   
2. http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/|title=Universal Declaration of Human Rights|website=www.un.org|language=en|access-date=2017-10-10}
3. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/garry-davis-gadfly-and-world-citizen-no-1-dies-at-91/2013/08/06/2c1544c8-fdde-11e2-96a8-d3b921c0924a_story.html?utm_term=.13e989ef775b
4.[http://www.worldservice.org/gov.html "What is the World Government of World Citizens”
[5]http://www.worldservice.org/visas.html
[6]Table of travel documents entitling the holder to cross the external borders and which may be endorsed with a visa - (Parts II and II) and Part V (documents to which visas cannot be affixed. Council of the European Union. 1 December 2008. The World Passport is placed in the latter category
[7] http://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/nansen-passport-refugees 
ArthurKane (talk) 08:33, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Using the word 'issue' is dishonest. This would imply that the World Passport is something more than a private creation without any legal force. Here's a lesson in public international law: in order for someone to make a legal act on the international scene, they need to be a subject of international law. The WSA is not a subject of international law and it is not de jure regarded as one by any other subject of international law. Due to not being a subject of international law, WSA cannot issue lawful passports. Visa should not be written in capital letters. Customary international law evolves; I do not accept that 1922 customary law would have allowed for a private organisation to sell private passports, it is clear that in 2017 international customary law does not allow private persons (moral or physical) to issue their own passports. Your edits are not facts, they are just misunderstandings of the elementary notions of public international law. Furthermore, a private person cannot make a binding interpretation of the UDHR. For these reasons, your edits were revoked. Île flottante (talk) 19:18, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your detailed reply, Île flottante.  You’ve covered all the pertinent points, and I think it would be fitting to close this discussion at this point.<BR>Wikipedia is not a blog for advocacy, which is what this user is promoting. A quick look back over the history of this article over just the last twelve months shows over a dozen new or IP users pushing the same arguments, and in all these cases (bar 1) they are only editing the World Passport article or Garry Davis, its creator.  I strongly suspect that some, or all, of these are the same person or a small clique of people pushing the same agenda. They register a user name, make the edits, and disappear.<BR>Almost all of these users seem to take umbrage with the word ‘fantasy’ despite widespread acceptance of that term by governments. .<BR>Is there some sort of arbitration that can close this discussion once and for all with a definitive ruling on the wording in the lede. .<BR>Thanks again for your hard work.--Dmol (talk) 00:40, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Dmol. I also agree that it is important that people remember that Wikipedia is not a platform to campaign for issues; it is a reference that must reflect reality. Île flottante (talk) 19:41, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is Factual Information with Proper Citations being replaced by Opinion? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on World Passport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110903031729/http://www.abakan-gazeta.ru/node/3508 to http://www.abakan-gazeta.ru/node/3508
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121120183232/http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/topic,4565c2252c,4565c25f39b,3ae6ace26c,0,,,NGA.html to http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/topic,4565c2252c,4565c25f39b,3ae6ace26c,0,,,NGA.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:50, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: I think such a section, detailing the justifications and reasons for producing this document, as given by the issuing organization should be added. This might be subjective, but, nevertheless, the reasons given by this organization since 1954 should be listed.
DL1982 (talk) 15:20, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree. Wikipedia is not a platform to publish private political opinions; it's an encyclopaedia.Île flottante (talk) 16:17, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  The article about the Iroquois passport describes it in the first sentence as "a form of identification and an "expression of sovereignty", based on the claims by the Iroquois League. Later in the article, the EU list of non acceptable documents is quoted in listing the Iroquois passport as a "fantasy passport". This is reasonable enough. Why is then the WSA passport defined in the first sentence as a "fantasy travel document", bases solely on the EU list? Why is the Iroquois passport not described as a "fantasy document" "sold" to "customers"? Who decides what is a "real passport"? The WSA passport is not the same as a souvenier sold by Conch Republic or NSK; it has a history of 60 years of use, archives to prove said use (photos of stamps on WSA site are only examples), and a legal department which actually intervenes on behalf of users vis a vis national officials. The lack of constant universal recognition does not make it "not real"; de facto and de jure recognition over the years make it valid. Many passports are not universaly recognized: The above mentioned Iroquois passport, passports issued by SMOM, Somaliland, Abkhazia abd even Republic of China (Taiwan) and Israel are not universaly recognized; that does not make them not valid or not real. Moreover, why is the insistence to claim WSA passports are "not recognized by anyone", when there are 1)official letters of recognition from six states and 2) thousands of visas and stamps on passport pages? You can not say all of those were "a mistake by border officials", especially not the visas and confirmations issued by consulates; in many cases, said officials must have had specific reasons to grant passage to the passport holder. In addition, getting a WSA passport is definietly not an "online purchase" - you get it either from a WSA agent, from a WSA stand at various conventions, directly from the office at Washington DC, or by mail - with an actual printed form AND a proof of identity. Also, unlike actual souvenier or fantasy passports, the WSA sends detailed information and documantation about its' passport to all states every several years. For your consideration. (The undersigned is not affiliated with WSA except for being a user of its' documents).DL1982 (talk) 13:13, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  This has already been discussed ad infinitum and therefore I'll only address new points not already discussed on this article's talk page. Israel and Taiwan have a government, a territory, a population, and are able to enter into agreements with other subjects of international law; the WSA has none of these characteristics and therefore the comparison between official documents issued by the ROC in Taiwan/Israel and fantasy documents sold by the WSA is ridiculous. The letters of recognition etc. are all antiquated; all stamps were issued in error; humans make errors. The Iroquois League is an organisation that represents a people, albeit a people lacking sovereignty. Let's be honest, the World Passport is just a toy produced by an organisation that lacks a solid understanding of international public law. Île flottante (talk) 18:41, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  Again, to conclude that "all stamps were made in error" is a subjective opinion, especially for printed machine readable visa stickers, in which cases the individuals who received them were surely thoroughly checked. The years of the letters of recognition does not make them less official. As you know, admittance and visa issuance is arbitrary, ofthen depending on your ethnicity and bank account (actually, showing a bank statement helps to get a visa on a World Passport... and any other passport). As for being a gimmick or a toy.. Garry Davis would have agreed, as he said "national passports are a joke on us, so we made the World Passport which is a joke on them".. It is a tool you must know how to use. I have spoken with WSA president and personaly met Garry Davis - they aren't there to dupe people, but for a cause - all WSA documents are part of an aim to get human rights protected and respected by law - globaly. And finaly - the WSA might be an organization, but it is the administrative arm of the World Government of World Citizens - which represents a people lacking a soveregnty - humanity. DL1982 (talk) 08:23, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

text: Sorry, but this is starting to get annoying.  You have no intent of contributing to Wikipedia and are only using it to advocate for the WSA and its products.  This is not a forum, nor a soapbox for promotion. --Dmol (talk) 09:26, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I second Dmol’s sentiments entirely. This superfluous discussion does nothing to improve the article or Wikipedia. Île flottante (talk) 10:28, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  WSA justifications section 

message: My recent edit adding a list of several holders of World Passport was removed by user:Dmol, claiming "these are not official "souveniers". The fact is, the list of World Passport holders already contains persons who received a passport directly from Garry Davis, and this is the same for my recent edit, which shows exactly what it claims: persons who were given a World Passport on their name personaly by Garry Davis, with references from books which were published and printed, including photographs of said meetings. And calling this document "souvenier" is a subjective opinion - you might as well call the SMOM passport or Somaliland passport "souveniers".
DL1982 (talk) 11:37, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree with the term ‘holder.’ The appropriate term is owner. If you were to buy any other product, you would be described as its owner; someone who buys a gameboy is not a gameboy holder. Using the word ‘holder’ dishonestly implies that the World Passport is an actual passport. Île flottante (talk) 22:15, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I have converted the list to text and trimmed it to several prominent examples over a few different categories. --Dmol (talk) 07:38, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

text: This is definitely "holder". Even for a membership card we call it holder. A World Passport has the obvious characters of an identity document and it is not a gameboy. You must submit required application documents and get it issued, and WSA is the only organization can issue it. You cannot buy World Passports from a shop. (I don't know what happened to you personally with WSA but please stop your harassment.) 119.104.106.131 (talk) 08:01, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Holders of World Passport 

message: The article pretends that the only instances of acceptance in these nations are several decades old. As a matter of fact, the World Service Authority has stamps and visas for these nations as recent as 2017, and that's besides the fact that these six nations (Burkina Faso, Ecuador, Mauritania, Tanzania, Togo, and Zambia) officially accept the passport. As in, they consider it valid.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.165.209.158 (talk) 19:41, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can source a recently issued official document issued by one of the aforementioned countries explicitly listing the World Passport as a suitable document for entry at their borders, then you’d be right. Currently all the WSA has to show are some mistakes made by government officials who probably didn’t know they had been presented with a fantasy passport and not a genuine travel document. Here’s an example. Suppose a Swiss border guard stamped a non visaed Russian passport to grant visa-free entry to that particular Russian national; that would not mean that the Schengen visa policy suddenly grants visa-free access to Russian nationals, but rather it just means that that border guard made a mistake. Likewise, all these stamps and visas are just examples of humans not being machines and making mistakes. Île flottante (talk) 21:52, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree with Île flottante. There's reams of the same discussion on this talk page, all claiming the same arguments. And once again, it's a single use account who has no intention of contributing to Wikipedia in any way other than to spam the World Passport. --Dmol (talk) 00:27, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accepted de jure by six nations