https://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php?action=feedcontributions&feedformat=atom&user=Arkarull 2025-01-10T05:52:27Z User contributions MediaWiki 1.44.0-wmf.11 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Arkarull/Books/Estonia&diff=1096667764 2022-07-05T22:58:13Z

<p>Arkarull: /* Daŭri Source Book II */</p> <hr /> <div>{{saved book<br /> |title=<br /> |subtitle=<br /> |cover-image=<br /> |cover-color=<br /> | setting-papersize = a4<br /> | setting-toc = auto<br /> | setting-columns = 2<br /> }}<br /> <br /> == Estonian Literature ==<br /> === Daŭri Source Book II ===<br /> ;Context<br /> :[[Estonian literature]]<br /> ;Awards<br /> :[[Juhan Smuul literary award]]<br /> :[[Friedebert Tuglas short story award]]<br /> ;Writers<br /> ;Female writers<br /> :[[List of Estonian women writers]]<br /> :[[Kai Aareleid]]<br /> :[[Margit Adorf]]<br /> :[[Eda Ahi]]<br /> :[[Silvia Airik-Priuhka]]<br /> :[[Ave Alavainu]]<br /> :[[Betti Alver]]<br /> :[[Epp Annus]]<br /> :[[Elisabeth Aspe]]<br /> :[[Elise Aun]]<br /> :[[Aimée Beekman]]<br /> :[[Maimu Berg]]<br /> :[[Piret Bristol]]<br /> :[[Hilda Dresen]]<br /> :[[Kristiina Ehin]]<br /> :[[Salme Ekbaum]]<br /> :[[Anna Haava]]<br /> :[[Lehte Hainsalu]]<br /> :[[Aime Hansen]]<br /> :[[Viiu Härm]]<br /> :[[Marie Heiberg]]<br /> :[[Kärt Hellerma]]<br /> :[[Kadri Hinrikus]]<br /> :[[Merle Jääger]]<br /> :[[Piret Jaaks]]<br /> :[[Elvy Kalep]]<br /> :[[Kätlin Kaldmaa]]<br /> :[[Aino Kallas]]<br /> :[[Maarja Kangro]]<br /> :[[Doris Kareva]]<br /> :[[Merle Karusoo]]<br /> :[[Kristiina Kass]]<br /> :[[Leida Kibuvits]]<br /> :[[Lydia Koidula]]<br /> :[[Ilmi Kolla]]<br /> :[[Herta Laipaik]]<br /> :[[Anu Lamp]]<br /> :[[Eha Lättemäe]]<br /> :[[Viivi Luik]]<br /> :[[Heljo Mänd]]<br /> :[[Kersti Merilaas]]<br /> :[[Ene Mihkelson]]<br /> :[[Reed Morn]]<br /> :[[Kati Murutar]]<br /> :[[Ellen Niit]]<br /> :[[Dagmar Normet]]<br /> :[[Minni Nurme]]<br /> :[[Liisi Ojamaa]]<br /> :[[Imbi Paju]]<br /> :[[Eeva Park]]<br /> :[[Aino Pervik]]<br /> :[[Asta Põldmäe]]<br /> :[[Ketlin Priilinn]]<br /> :[[Lilli Promet]]<br /> :[[Helju Rebane]]<br /> :[[Astrid Reinla]]<br /> :[[Mari Saat]]<br /> :[[Ly Seppel]]<br /> :[[Kertu Sillaste]]<br /> :[[Andra Teede]]<br /> :[[Leida Tigane]]<br /> :[[Tiia Toomet]]<br /> :[[Leelo Tungal]]<br /> :[[Kauksi Ülle]]<br /> :[[Marie Under]]<br /> :[[Eia Uus]]<br /> :[[Debora Vaarandi]]<br /> :[[Kätlin Vainola]]<br /> :[[Aidi Vallik]]<br /> :[[Elo Viiding]]<br /> :[[Hella Wuolijoki]]<br /> ;Male writers<br /> :[[Valmar Adams]]<br /> :[[Vahur Afanasjev]]<br /> :[[Tiit Aleksejev]]<br /> :[[Nigol Andresen]]<br /> :[[August Annist]]<br /> :[[Aleksander Antson]]<br /> :[[Karl Ast]]<br /> :[[Nikolai Baturin]]<br /> :[[Veiko Belials]]<br /> :[[Eduard Bornhöhe]]<br /> :[[Andres Ehin]]<br /> :[[Jüri Ehlvest]]<br /> :[[Eero Epner]]<br /> :[[Urmas Espenberg]]<br /> :[[P. I. Filimonov]]<br /> :[[Karl Oskar Freiberg]]<br /> :[[Meelis Friedenthal]]<br /> :[[August Gailit]]<br /> :[[Ado Grenzstein]]<br /> :[[Villem Gross]]<br /> :[[Ivar Grünthal]]<br /> :[[Paul Haavaoks]]<br /> :[[Indrek Hargla]]<br /> :[[Gert Helbemäe]]<br /> :[[Peeter Helme]]<br /> :[[Sass Henno]]<br /> :[[Karl August Hermann]]<br /> :[[Karl August Hindrey]]<br /> :[[Aadu Hint]]<br /> :[[Indrek Hirv]]<br /> :[[Andrei Hvostov]]<br /> :[[Väino Ilus]]<br /> :[[Andrei Ivanov (writer)]]<br /> :[[Juhan Jaik]]<br /> :[[Carl Robert Jakobson]]<br /> :[[August Jakobson]]<br /> :[[Peeter Jakobson (writer)]]<br /> :[[Ilmar Jaks]]<br /> :[[Kaspar Jancis]]<br /> :[[Heldur Jõgioja]]<br /> :[[Harri Jõgisalu]]<br /> :[[Mihkel Jürna]]<br /> :[[Mart Juur]]<br /> :[[Boris Kabur]]<br /> :[[Bernard Kangro]]<br /> :[[Teet Kallas]]<br /> :[[Toomas Kall]]<br /> :[[Ain Kalmus]]<br /> :[[Tiit Kändler]]<br /> :[[Kalju Kangur]]<br /> :[[Mart Kangur]]<br /> :[[Raimond Kaugver]]<br /> :[[Mika Keränen]]<br /> :[[Kalev Kesküla]]<br /> :[[Enn Kippel]]<br /> :[[Madis Kõiv]]<br /> :[[Raimond Kolk]]<br /> :[[Martin Körber]]<br /> :[[Juhan Kreem]]<br /> :[[Kalju Kruusa]]<br /> :[[Jaan Kruusvall]]<br /> :[[Märt Kubo]]<br /> :[[Juhan Kunder]]<br /> :[[Timotheus Kuusik]]<br /> :[[Kalle Käsper]]<br /> :[[Jan Kaus]]<br /> :[[Kaur Kender]]<br /> :[[Heino Kiik]]<br /> :[[Albert Kivikas]]<br /> :[[Andrus Kivirähk]]<br /> :[[Ahti Kõo]]<br /> :[[Jaan Kross]]<br /> :[[Erni Krusten]]<br /> :[[Leo Kunnas]]<br /> :[[Robert Kurvitz]]<br /> :[[Paul Kuusberg]]<br /> :[[Harald-Paul Keerdo]]<br /> :[[August Kitzberg]]<br /> :[[Sven Kivisildnik]]<br /> :[[Armin Kõomägi]]<br /> :[[Kalle Kurg]]<br /> :[[Vello Lään]]<br /> :[[Riho Lahi]]<br /> :[[Andres Langemets]]<br /> :[[Hans Leberecht]]<br /> :[[Jakob Liiv]]<br /> :[[Jüri Lina]]<br /> :[[Ardi Liives]]<br /> :[[Oskar Luts]]<br /> :[[Bernhard Linde]]<br /> :[[Juhan Liiv]]<br /> :[[Iko Maran]]<br /> :[[Paavo Matsin]]<br /> :[[Ülo Mattheus]]<br /> :[[Mats Mõtslane]]<br /> :[[August Mälk]]<br /> :[[Jakob Mändmets]]<br /> :[[Mait Metsanurk]]<br /> :[[Mihkel Mutt]]<br /> :[[Karl Nikolai von Nolcken]]<br /> :[[Enn Nõu]]<br /> :[[Valter Ojakäär]]<br /> :[[Jaan Oks]]<br /> :[[Ants Oras]]<br /> :[[Ervin Õunapuu]]<br /> :[[Tõnu Õnnepalu]]<br /> :[[Eduard Päll]]<br /> :[[Jüri Parijõgi]]<br /> :[[Ralf Parve]]<br /> :[[Juhan Peegel]]<br /> :[[Rein Põder]]<br /> :[[Janno Põldma]]<br /> :[[Anti Poolamets]]<br /> :[[Lauri Pilter]]<br /> :[[Tanel Rander]]<br /> :[[Jaan Rannap]]<br /> :[[Mihkel Raud]]<br /> :[[Rein Raud]]<br /> :[[Hugo Karl Ferdinand Reiman]]<br /> :[[Hendrik Relve]]<br /> :[[Egon Rannet]]<br /> :[[Toomas Raudam]]<br /> :[[Karl Ristikivi]]<br /> :[[Aarne Ruben]]<br /> :[[Anti Saar]]<br /> :[[Rein Saluri]]<br /> :[[Ernst Särgava]]<br /> :[[Rainer Sarnet]]<br /> :[[Peeter Sauter]]<br /> :[[Leo Sepp]]<br /> :[[Herman Sergo]]<br /> :[[Ilmar Sikemäe]]<br /> :[[Mati Sirkel]]<br /> :[[Lauri Sommer]]<br /> :[[Edgar Spriit]]<br /> :[[Kulno Süvalep]]<br /> :[[Raivo Seppo]]<br /> :[[Juhan Smuul]]<br /> :[[Ilmar Taska]]<br /> :[[Aleksander Tassa]]<br /> :[[Mihkel Tiks]]<br /> :[[Jaan Tomp (journalist)]]<br /> :[[Jaan Tooming]]<br /> :[[Toivo Tootsen]]<br /> :[[Uido Truija]]<br /> :[[Friedebert Tuglas]]<br /> :[[Jüri Tuulik]]<br /> :[[Ülo Tuulik]]<br /> :[[Ilmar Talve]]<br /> :[[A. H. Tammsaare]]<br /> :[[Tarmo Teder]]<br /> :[[Mats Traat]]<br /> :[[Valev Uibopuu]]<br /> :[[Jaan Undusk]]<br /> :[[Mati Unt]]<br /> :[[Albert Uustulnd]]<br /> :[[Edgar Valter]]<br /> :[[Vaino Vahing]]<br /> :[[Enn Vetemaa]]<br /> :[[Arved Viirlaid]]<br /> :[[Eduard Vilde]]<br /> :[[Toomas Vint]]<br /> :[[Urmas Vadi]]<br /> :[[Mait Vaik]]<br /> ;Publishers<br /> :[[List of publishing companies of Estonia]]<br /> :[[Ajakirjade Kirjastus]]<br /> :[[Eesti Kirjanike Kooperatiiv]]<br /> :[[Eesti Raamat]]<br /> :[[Estonian State Publishing House]]<br /> :[[Orto (company)]]<br /> :[[Publishing House ERSEN]]<br /> :[[Raudwara]]<br /> :[[Tänapäev]]<br /> :[[University of Tartu Press]]<br /> :[[Valgus (publisher)]]<br /> :[[Varrak]]</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Arkarull/Books/Estonia&diff=1096667646 2022-07-05T22:57:01Z

<p>Arkarull: ←Created page with '{{saved book |title= |subtitle= |cover-image= |cover-color= | setting-papersize = a4 | setting-toc = auto | setting-columns = 2 }} == Estonian Literature == === Daŭri Source Book II === :Estonian literature :Juhan Smuul literary award :Friedebert Tuglas short story award ;Context ;Awards :List of Estonian women writers :Kai Aareleid :Margit Adorf :Eda Ahi :Silvia Airik-Priuhka :Ave Alavainu :Betti Alver :Ep...'</p> <hr /> <div>{{saved book<br /> |title=<br /> |subtitle=<br /> |cover-image=<br /> |cover-color=<br /> | setting-papersize = a4<br /> | setting-toc = auto<br /> | setting-columns = 2<br /> }}<br /> <br /> == Estonian Literature ==<br /> === Daŭri Source Book II ===<br /> :[[Estonian literature]]<br /> :[[Juhan Smuul literary award]]<br /> :[[Friedebert Tuglas short story award]]<br /> ;Context<br /> ;Awards<br /> :[[List of Estonian women writers]]<br /> :[[Kai Aareleid]]<br /> :[[Margit Adorf]]<br /> :[[Eda Ahi]]<br /> :[[Silvia Airik-Priuhka]]<br /> :[[Ave Alavainu]]<br /> :[[Betti Alver]]<br /> :[[Epp Annus]]<br /> :[[Elisabeth Aspe]]<br /> :[[Elise Aun]]<br /> :[[Aimée Beekman]]<br /> :[[Maimu Berg]]<br /> :[[Piret Bristol]]<br /> :[[Hilda Dresen]]<br /> :[[Kristiina Ehin]]<br /> :[[Salme Ekbaum]]<br /> :[[Anna Haava]]<br /> :[[Lehte Hainsalu]]<br /> :[[Aime Hansen]]<br /> :[[Viiu Härm]]<br /> :[[Marie Heiberg]]<br /> :[[Kärt Hellerma]]<br /> :[[Kadri Hinrikus]]<br /> :[[Merle Jääger]]<br /> :[[Piret Jaaks]]<br /> :[[Elvy Kalep]]<br /> :[[Kätlin Kaldmaa]]<br /> :[[Aino Kallas]]<br /> :[[Maarja Kangro]]<br /> :[[Doris Kareva]]<br /> :[[Merle Karusoo]]<br /> :[[Kristiina Kass]]<br /> :[[Leida Kibuvits]]<br /> :[[Lydia Koidula]]<br /> :[[Ilmi Kolla]]<br /> :[[Herta Laipaik]]<br /> :[[Anu Lamp]]<br /> :[[Eha Lättemäe]]<br /> :[[Viivi Luik]]<br /> :[[Heljo Mänd]]<br /> :[[Kersti Merilaas]]<br /> :[[Ene Mihkelson]]<br /> :[[Reed Morn]]<br /> :[[Kati Murutar]]<br /> :[[Ellen Niit]]<br /> :[[Dagmar Normet]]<br /> :[[Minni Nurme]]<br /> :[[Liisi Ojamaa]]<br /> :[[Imbi Paju]]<br /> :[[Eeva Park]]<br /> :[[Aino Pervik]]<br /> :[[Asta Põldmäe]]<br /> :[[Ketlin Priilinn]]<br /> :[[Lilli Promet]]<br /> :[[Helju Rebane]]<br /> :[[Astrid Reinla]]<br /> :[[Mari Saat]]<br /> :[[Ly Seppel]]<br /> :[[Kertu Sillaste]]<br /> :[[Andra Teede]]<br /> :[[Leida Tigane]]<br /> :[[Tiia Toomet]]<br /> :[[Leelo Tungal]]<br /> :[[Kauksi Ülle]]<br /> :[[Marie Under]]<br /> :[[Eia Uus]]<br /> :[[Debora Vaarandi]]<br /> :[[Kätlin Vainola]]<br /> :[[Aidi Vallik]]<br /> :[[Elo Viiding]]<br /> :[[Hella Wuolijoki]]<br /> ;Writers<br /> ;Female writers<br /> ;Male writers<br /> :[[Valmar Adams]]<br /> :[[Vahur Afanasjev]]<br /> :[[Tiit Aleksejev]]<br /> :[[Nigol Andresen]]<br /> :[[August Annist]]<br /> :[[Aleksander Antson]]<br /> :[[Karl Ast]]<br /> :[[Nikolai Baturin]]<br /> :[[Veiko Belials]]<br /> :[[Eduard Bornhöhe]]<br /> :[[Andres Ehin]]<br /> :[[Jüri Ehlvest]]<br /> :[[Eero Epner]]<br /> :[[Urmas Espenberg]]<br /> :[[P. I. Filimonov]]<br /> :[[Karl Oskar Freiberg]]<br /> :[[Meelis Friedenthal]]<br /> :[[August Gailit]]<br /> :[[Ado Grenzstein]]<br /> :[[Villem Gross]]<br /> :[[Ivar Grünthal]]<br /> :[[Paul Haavaoks]]<br /> :[[Indrek Hargla]]<br /> :[[Gert Helbemäe]]<br /> :[[Peeter Helme]]<br /> :[[Sass Henno]]<br /> :[[Karl August Hermann]]<br /> :[[Karl August Hindrey]]<br /> :[[Aadu Hint]]<br /> :[[Indrek Hirv]]<br /> :[[Andrei Hvostov]]<br /> :[[Väino Ilus]]<br /> :[[Andrei Ivanov (writer)]]<br /> :[[Juhan Jaik]]<br /> :[[Carl Robert Jakobson]]<br /> :[[August Jakobson]]<br /> :[[Peeter Jakobson (writer)]]<br /> :[[Ilmar Jaks]]<br /> :[[Kaspar Jancis]]<br /> :[[Heldur Jõgioja]]<br /> :[[Harri Jõgisalu]]<br /> :[[Mihkel Jürna]]<br /> :[[Mart Juur]]<br /> :[[Boris Kabur]]<br /> :[[Bernard Kangro]]<br /> :[[Teet Kallas]]<br /> :[[Toomas Kall]]<br /> :[[Ain Kalmus]]<br /> :[[Tiit Kändler]]<br /> :[[Kalju Kangur]]<br /> :[[Mart Kangur]]<br /> :[[Raimond Kaugver]]<br /> :[[Mika Keränen]]<br /> :[[Kalev Kesküla]]<br /> :[[Enn Kippel]]<br /> :[[Madis Kõiv]]<br /> :[[Raimond Kolk]]<br /> :[[Martin Körber]]<br /> :[[Juhan Kreem]]<br /> :[[Kalju Kruusa]]<br /> :[[Jaan Kruusvall]]<br /> :[[Märt Kubo]]<br /> :[[Juhan Kunder]]<br /> :[[Timotheus Kuusik]]<br /> :[[Kalle Käsper]]<br /> :[[Jan Kaus]]<br /> :[[Kaur Kender]]<br /> :[[Heino Kiik]]<br /> :[[Albert Kivikas]]<br /> :[[Andrus Kivirähk]]<br /> :[[Ahti Kõo]]<br /> :[[Jaan Kross]]<br /> :[[Erni Krusten]]<br /> :[[Leo Kunnas]]<br /> :[[Robert Kurvitz]]<br /> :[[Paul Kuusberg]]<br /> :[[Harald-Paul Keerdo]]<br /> :[[August Kitzberg]]<br /> :[[Sven Kivisildnik]]<br /> :[[Armin Kõomägi]]<br /> :[[Kalle Kurg]]<br /> :[[Vello Lään]]<br /> :[[Riho Lahi]]<br /> :[[Andres Langemets]]<br /> :[[Hans Leberecht]]<br /> :[[Jakob Liiv]]<br /> :[[Jüri Lina]]<br /> :[[Ardi Liives]]<br /> :[[Oskar Luts]]<br /> :[[Bernhard Linde]]<br /> :[[Juhan Liiv]]<br /> :[[Iko Maran]]<br /> :[[Paavo Matsin]]<br /> :[[Ülo Mattheus]]<br /> :[[Mats Mõtslane]]<br /> :[[August Mälk]]<br /> :[[Jakob Mändmets]]<br /> :[[Mait Metsanurk]]<br /> :[[Mihkel Mutt]]<br /> :[[Karl Nikolai von Nolcken]]<br /> :[[Enn Nõu]]<br /> :[[Valter Ojakäär]]<br /> :[[Jaan Oks]]<br /> :[[Ants Oras]]<br /> :[[Ervin Õunapuu]]<br /> :[[Tõnu Õnnepalu]]<br /> :[[Eduard Päll]]<br /> :[[Jüri Parijõgi]]<br /> :[[Ralf Parve]]<br /> :[[Juhan Peegel]]<br /> :[[Rein Põder]]<br /> :[[Janno Põldma]]<br /> :[[Anti Poolamets]]<br /> :[[Lauri Pilter]]<br /> :[[Tanel Rander]]<br /> :[[Jaan Rannap]]<br /> :[[Mihkel Raud]]<br /> :[[Rein Raud]]<br /> :[[Hugo Karl Ferdinand Reiman]]<br /> :[[Hendrik Relve]]<br /> :[[Egon Rannet]]<br /> :[[Toomas Raudam]]<br /> :[[Karl Ristikivi]]<br /> :[[Aarne Ruben]]<br /> :[[Anti Saar]]<br /> :[[Ernst Särgava]]<br /> :[[Rainer Sarnet]]<br /> :[[Leo Sepp]]<br /> :[[Herman Sergo]]<br /> :[[Ilmar Sikemäe]]<br /> :[[Mati Sirkel]]<br /> :[[Lauri Sommer]]<br /> :[[Edgar Spriit]]<br /> :[[Kulno Süvalep]]<br /> :[[Raivo Seppo]]<br /> :[[Juhan Smuul]]<br /> :[[Ilmar Taska]]<br /> :[[Aleksander Tassa]]<br /> :[[Mihkel Tiks]]<br /> :[[Jaan Tomp (journalist)]]<br /> :[[Jaan Tooming]]<br /> :[[Toivo Tootsen]]<br /> :[[Uido Truija]]<br /> :[[Friedebert Tuglas]]<br /> :[[Jüri Tuulik]]<br /> :[[Ülo Tuulik]]<br /> :[[Ilmar Talve]]<br /> :[[A. H. Tammsaare]]<br /> :[[Tarmo Teder]]<br /> :[[Peeter Sauter]]<br /> :[[Rein Saluri]]<br /> :[[Mats Traat]]<br /> :[[Valev Uibopuu]]<br /> :[[Jaan Undusk]]<br /> :[[Mati Unt]]<br /> :[[Albert Uustulnd]]<br /> :[[Edgar Valter]]<br /> :[[Vaino Vahing]]<br /> :[[Enn Vetemaa]]<br /> :[[Arved Viirlaid]]<br /> :[[Eduard Vilde]]<br /> :[[Toomas Vint]]<br /> :[[Urmas Vadi]]<br /> :[[Mait Vaik]]<br /> ;Publishers<br /> :[[List of publishing companies of Estonia]]<br /> :[[Ajakirjade Kirjastus]]<br /> :[[Eesti Kirjanike Kooperatiiv]]<br /> :[[Eesti Raamat]]<br /> :[[Estonian State Publishing House]]<br /> :[[Orto (company)]]<br /> :[[Publishing House ERSEN]]<br /> :[[Raudwara]]<br /> :[[Tänapäev]]<br /> :[[University of Tartu Press]]<br /> :[[Valgus (publisher)]]<br /> :[[Varrak]]</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Arkarull&diff=1096650006 2022-07-05T20:47:31Z

<p>Arkarull: /* Translating within Wikipedia requires attribution */ Reply</p> <hr /> <div>==Your recent edits==<br /> [[Image:Information.svg|25px|link=]] Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to [[Wikipedia:Talk page|talk pages]] and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should [[Wikipedia:Signatures|sign your posts]] by typing four [[tilde]]s ( &amp;#126;&amp;#126;&amp;#126;&amp;#126; ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button [[File:Insert-signature.png|link=Wikipedia:How to sign your posts]] located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. &lt;!-- Template:uw-tilde --&gt; --[[User:SineBot|SineBot]] ([[User talk:SineBot|talk]]) 21:56, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Translating within Wikipedia requires attribution ==<br /> <br /> [[File:Information.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]] Thank you for [[Special:Contributions/Arkarull|your contributions]] to Wikipedia. It appears that you translated text from [[:es:Literatura de Andorra]] to [[:Literature of Andorra]]. While you are welcome to translate Wikipedia content, here or elsewhere, [[WP:Copyrights|Wikipedia's licensing]] requires that you provide attribution to the contributor(s) of the original article. When translating from a foreign-language Wikipedia article, this is supplied at a minimum in an [[Help:Edit summary|edit summary]] on the page where you add translated content, identifying it as a translation and [[Help:Link#Wikilinks|linking]] it to the source page. For example: &lt;code&gt;Content in this edit is translated from the existing French Wikipedia article at &lt;nowiki&gt;[[:fr:Exact name of French article]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;; see its history for attribution.&lt;/code&gt; It is good practice, especially if translation is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{tl|translated page}} template on the talk pages of the destination article. If you have added translated content previously which was not attributed at the time it was added, please [[WP:RIA|add attribution retrospectively for that also]], even if it was a long time ago. You can read more about author attribution and the reasons for it at [[WP:TFOLWP|Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia]]. Thank you. &lt;!-- Template:uw-translation --&gt; [[User:DanCherek|DanCherek]] ([[User talk:DanCherek|talk]]) 20:14, 5 July 2022 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Thank you for your instructions. I have already incorporated the attribution to the article. Best regards. [[User:Arkarull|Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull#top|talk]]) 20:47, 5 July 2022 (UTC)</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Literature_of_Andorra&diff=1096649450 2022-07-05T20:43:46Z

<p>Arkarull: Add translation attribution.</p> <hr /> <div>The '''literature of Andorra''' is part of [[Catalan literature]], that is, of literature in the [[Catalan language]]. It is the [[literature]] represented by the writings created in the [[Andorra|Principality of Andorra]] or by Andorran authors.<br /> <br /> == The beginnings of Andorran literature ==<br /> <br /> The ''Encyclopedic Dictionary of Andorra'', by [[Àlvar Valls]], presents the image of a literature that already produced its first works in the 18th century, with the ''[[Manual Digest]]'' by [[Antoni Fiter i Rossell]] and the ''Politar Andorrà'' by [[Antoni Puig]]. The ''Manual Digest'' &quot;is a &quot;compendium of the historical and institutional reality and of the uses and customs of Andorra followed by a compilation of annotated maxims, which is considered one of the most important books of its kind in the Catalan language of the 18th century and that for more than three centuries has been a source of reference and a behavioral guide for the rulers of Andorra and Andorrans in general.&quot; (Vals, 259). In the 19th century, religious works stand out and [[travel literature]] also appears, especially written by foreigners.<br /> <br /> === Manual Digest ===<br /> <br /> The book by '''Antoni Fiter i Rossell''' is entitled ''Manual Digest de las Valls neutras de Andorra, en lo qual se tracta de sa Antiguitat, Govern y Religio, de sos Privilegis, Usos, Preheminencias y Prerrogativas''. It is an eminent work of literature in the Catalan language of the 18th century. For more than three centuries it was used as a manual for the governors of the principality, as for the inhabitants of the Valleys. The book was kept in the [[Casa de la Vall]], the central place of the [[General Council (Andorra)|General Council of Andorra]]. In 1987 the General Council published a facsimile&lt;ref&gt;[[#Fit87|Fiter Rossell 1987]]&lt;/ref&gt; and in 2000 the Manual Digest was published as a pocket book.&lt;ref&gt;[[#Can98|Canturri 1998]]: 79-80&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> <br /> === Historical and institutional works ===<br /> <br /> In 1763 Antoni Puig published the ''Politar Andorrà''. Puig was a [[Priesthood in the Catholic Church|priest]] in [[Escaldes-Engordany]]. This book is a kind of reduced version of the ''Manual Digest'', but it also had a great influence on Andorran society.&lt;ref&gt;[[#Mas15|Massa 2015]]: 419-426&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> <br /> Until the 19th century, the tradition of historical and institutional manuals continued. It is worth mentioning the ''Relació sobre la vall de Andorra'' of 1838, by the [[Dominican Order|Dominican brother]] [[Tomás Junoy]]&lt;ref&gt;[[#Fer14|Fernández González 2014]]&lt;/ref&gt; and ''Història de Nostra [[Our Lady of Meritxell|Senyora de Meritxell]]'' of 1874, written by the [[Society of Jesus|Jesuit]] [[Luis Ignasi Fiter i Cava]] who in the principality published the book [[anonymously]].<br /> <br /> == Travel literature ==<br /> <br /> At the end of the 18th century, a literature known as '''travel literature''' was formed. Typically, the works of this literature were not written by Andorrans but by foreign travelers, especially from [[France]], [[Spain]] or the [[United States]]. Àlvar Valls Oliva distinguishes the authors into three groups:<br /> <br /> 1) Officials from neighboring states.<br /> 2) Romantic travelers or utopians.<br /> 3) Catalan travelers.<br /> <br /> [[Francisco de Zamora]], who in his story ''Diary of trips made in Catalonia'' writes extensively about Andorra; [[Pascual Madoz]], who in the ''Geographical, statistical and historical dictionary of Spain and its overseas possessions'' also includes a chronicle of the Pyrenean country.<br /> <br /> The Spanish soldier [[Antoni Valls]] published in 1820 in [[Barcelona]] the book ''Memory on the sovereignty that corresponds to the Spanish Nation'', where he recommends the annexation of Andorra by Spain. The political answer appeared three years later by the French [[Monarchism in France|monarchist]] [[Pierre-Roch Roussillou]] who wrote the book ''De l'Andorre (About Andorra)'', at the same time the first complete monograph on the principality.<br /> <br /> For romantic travelers and American and French [[Utopia|utopians]], Andorra was an isolated, exotic and sometimes strange country. The French [[Victorin Vidal]] wrote ''L'Andorre'' in 1866, and [[Marcel Chevalier]] presented the first map of the Andorran valleys. [[Gaston Vuillier]] published ''Le val de Andorre'' in 1888. The Americans [[Bayard Taylor]] with ''The Republic of the Pyrenees'' in 1867 and ''The Hidden Republic'' in 1911 as well as [[Lee Meriwether (author)|Lee Meriwether]] with ''Seeing Europe by automobile'', also in 1911. In 1933, the French [[Gaston Combarnous]] published ''The valleys of Andorra'' and in 1937 [[Imogene Warder]] published ''On foot through Andorra''.<br /> <br /> The accounts of [[catalonia|Catalan travelers]] around 1900 show quite similar cultural interests. [[Joseph Aladern]] published the ''Cartas andorranas'' in 1892. Other important authors are [[Valentí Almirall i Llozer|Valentí Almirall]], [[Salvador Armet]], [[Artur Osona]] and [[Jacint Verdaguer]].<br /> <br /> In the 20th century, some authors chose the principality as the subject of their works, especially in [[French literature|French]] and [[Catalan literature]]. In addition, essays were published such as the ''Llibre d'Andorra'' by [[Lluís Capdevila]] in 1958, the ''Glossari andorrà'' by [[Josep Fontbernat]] in 1966, as well as the essays by the Catalan writer [[Josep Pla]], published in 1943, 1959 and 1973.<br /> <br /> The ''L'Andorra dels viatgers'' series once again presents the old travel texts, edited by contemporary authors, for example [[Albert Villaró]]. Today, despite the fact that the Principality of Andorra has a modern circulation network and is connected to the international media, only a few books about Andorra are written by foreign writers. One example is the [[Austria|Austrian]] author [[Klaus Ebner]] who published the essay ''Andorranische Impressionen (Andorran Impressions)'' at the Wieser publishing house in [[Carinthia]]. The writer [[Alfred Llahí Segalàs]] recounted the passage of [[Josemaría Escrivá|Saint Josemaría Escrivá de Balaguer]] through the Principality of Andorra in 1937, in his book ''Andorra: host soil'' (2007). On the other hand, the Andorran writer [[Joan Peruga]] chose Andorran travel literature, especially that of the 19th century, as the central theme of his 2004 novel ''The Invisible Republic''.&lt;ref&gt;[[#Per12|El Periòdic d'Andorra]]&lt;/ref&gt; <br /> <br /> == Contemporary literature ==<br /> <br /> &quot;Modern&quot; literature began in the 1980s and intensified as a result of the independence of the [[Condominium (international law)|condominium]] in 1993. The [[General Council (Andorra)|General Council of Andorra]], that is, the Andorran [[parliament]], and the new government began to decisively promote literature with calls, prizes and measures in schools. Today there are several Andorran authors who already have a remarkable reputation in the '''[[Catalan Countries|Països Catalans]]''', for example [[Teresa Colom i Pich|Teresa Colom]], [[Antoni Morell Mora|Antoni Morell]], [[Albert Salvadó]] and [[Albert Villaró]]. At the [[Frankfurt Book Fair]] in 2007, seven Andorran authors participated in the events. The La Puça bookstore in Andorra la Vieja has become an information center for the country's authors.<br /> <br /> === Historical novel ===<br /> <br /> Many of the prose writers have written historical novels during their careers, reflecting on the history of the condominium. Albert Salvadó seems an exception because on the one hand he writes historical novels and on the other hand he rarely deals with the past of his country.<br /> <br /> We find Andorran topics in Antoni Morell's novels in ''Seven Litanies of Death'' and ''[[Boris Skossyreff|Boris I, King of Andorra]]''; of Albert Villaró in ''The Year of the [[Franks]]''; by [[Joan Peruga]] in ''Last summer in [[Ordino]]'' and by [[Josep Enric Dallerès]] in ''Inside the border''.<br /> <br /> === Poetry ===<br /> <br /> Thanks to the initiatives of the Andorran government, a poetic field grew. [[Manuel Anglada i Ferran]] published scientific works and poetry; and personalities such as [[Manel Gibert]], [[Sícoris]], [[Robert Pastor]], [[Teresa Colom i Pich|Teresa Colom]], [[Ester Fenoll Garcia]] and [[Marta Repullo i Grau|Marta Repullo]] represent the world of Andorran poetry. Until recently Josep Enric Dallerès published only poetry; in 2007 he published his first novel. Teresa Colom i Pich, an economist by training and by profession, decided in 2004 to dedicate herself exclusively to writing.<br /> <br /> === Literary awards ===<br /> <br /> Many literary prizes have been created in the [[Catalan Countries]]. Due to [[minority language]] status and strong cultural awareness, the awards aim to discover new talent and allow authors to dedicate exclusive time to writing.<br /> <br /> Many of Andorra's well-known writers have been awarded. For example, Antoni Morell won the [[San Miguel de Engolasters essay prize]] and the [[Charlemagne Prize]] for novels in 1999; Albert Salvadó twice won the [[Nèstor Luján Prize]] for [[Historical fiction|historical novels]] (1998 and 2005), the [[Fiter and Rossell Prize]] (1999), the [[Planeta Black Series Award]] (2000) and also the Charlemagne Prize for novels (2002); Albert Villaró received the Anna Dodas Memorial Prize (1993), the Nèstor Luján Prize (2003), the Charlemagne Prize for novels (2006), the Josep Pla (2014) and the [[Prudenci Bertrana Prize]] (2015), and Teresa Colom received the Poetry Contest Prize from the Government of Andorra Public Library (2000), the [[Grandalla Poetry Prize]] from the [[Circle of Arts and Letters of Andorra]] (2000), the [[FNAC Talent]] (2009) for ''On tot és vidre'' (Pagès Editors), and the [[Maria Àngels Anglada Prize|Maria Àngels Anglada Narrative Prize]] (2016), for ''Miss Keaton and other beasts''.<br /> <br /> === Andorran authors ===<br /> <br /> * [[Manuel Anglada i Ferran]], 1918-1998<br /> * [[David Arrabal Carrión]], b. 1977<br /> * [[Pilar Burgués Monserrat]], b. 1958<br /> * [[Montserrat Cayuela i Bragulat]], b. 1953<br /> * [[Teresa Colom i Pich]], b. 1973<br /> * [[Josep Enric Dallerès]], b. 1949<br /> * [[Ester Fenoll Garcia]], b. 1967<br /> * [[David Gálvez Casellas]], b. 1970<br /> * [[Alexandra Grebennikova Vólkova]], b. 1974<br /> * [[Manel Gibert Vallès]], b. 1966<br /> * [[Ludmilla Lacueva Canut]], b. 1971<br /> * [[Juli Minoves Triquell]], b. 1969<br /> * [[Antoni Morell Mora]], b. 1941<br /> * [[Robert Pastor i Castillo]], b. 1945<br /> * [[Joan Peruga|Joan Peruga Guerrero]], b. 1954<br /> * [[Marta Repullo i Grau]], b. 1976<br /> * [[Iñaki Rubio Manzano]], b. 1974<br /> * [[Albert Salvadó|Albert Salvadó Miras]], b. 1951<br /> * [[Rossend Marsol Clua|Sícoris]], 1922-2006<br /> * [[Albert Villaró|Albert Villaró Boix]], b. 1964<br /> * [[Anneke van de Wal]], b. 1968<br /> <br /> == Professional representation and publishers ==<br /> <br /> The '''[[Association of Writers of the Principality of Andorra]]''' (AEPA) is the professional representation of Andorran authors. Since its foundation in 1995, the president is [[Antoni Morell Mora]]. The AEPA maintains relations with the [[Associació d'Escriptors en Llengua Catalana|Association of Writers in the Catalan Language]] and the [[PEN International|Catalan PEN]].<br /> <br /> After the [[World War II|Second World War]], a very intensive publishing activity was developed in the Principality of Andorra. At first the publishers produced books for Spain and France, books in [[Spanish language|Spanish]] and French, and most of them were religious publications. The publication of books in the Catalan language began during the 1960s and increased during the following decade and especially after the death of the [[Francisco Franco|dictator Franco]]. The first contemporary Catalan [[Bible]] was published and printed in Andorra by order of the [[Benedictines|Benedictine monks]] of the [[Santa Maria de Montserrat Abbey|Montserrat monastery]], in the graphic workshops of the '''Editorial Casal y Vall'''.&lt;ref&gt;[[#Fon04|Fonolleda 2004]]&lt;/ref&gt; <br /> <br /> At the end of the 1970s, publishers changed their strategy to publish books for the use of the resident population (at the same time the Andorranization of education was being established). That is why, above all, books were published in the Catalan language, but also tourist books in other languages.<br /> <br /> Of the hundred publishers founded since World War II (including author-publishers), the number has shrunk considerably. They publish primarily literature, administrative books and tourist works. In May 2011, the '''Associació d'Editors d'Andorra''' was created, made up of Editorial Andorra, Limites Editorial, Anem editors, Edicions del [[Diari d'Andorra]] and Fundació Julià Reig. Most of the books by Andorran writers are published by Catalan publishers.<br /> <br /> Recently,{{when?|date=July 2022}} the publisher Trotalibros, which emerged from the YouTube channel and blog of the same name, is proving to be remarkably popular, both in Andorra and in Spain and [[Latin America]].{{cn|date=July 2022}}<br /> <br /> == Notes ==<br /> <br /> {{reflist|1}}<br /> <br /> == References ==<br /> <br /> *{{cite book |last=Canturri |first=Pere |author-link= |date=1998 |title=Manual Digest : 250è aniversari |url= |location=Andorra |publisher=Govern d'Andorra. Ministeri de Cultura i Turisme |chapter=Història i llegenda del Manual Digest |page= |isbn=9789992002049 |ref=Can98}}<br /> *{{cite web |url=http://www.cultura.ad/images/stories/biblios/fra_tom.pdf |title=Fra Tomàs Junoy, “Lo Peripatètic Solitari” |last=Fernández González |first=Júlia |date=2014 |website= |publisher=Biblioteca Nacional d'Andorra |access-date=22 January 2016 |quote= |ref=Fer14}}<br /> *{{cite book |last=Fiter Rossell |first=Antoni |author-link= |date=1987 |title=Manual Digest |url= |location=Andorra |publisher=Consell General |chapter= |page= |isbn=9991380019 |ref=Fit87}}<br /> *{{cite web |url=https://www.cultura.ad/publicacions-sobre-llengua/ex-libris-casa-bauro/numero-7-2004 |title=L'Editorial Casal i Vall |last=Fonolleda |first=Pere Miquel |date=2004 |website= |publisher=Biblioteca Nacional d'Andorra |access-date= |quote= |ref=Fon04}}<br /> *{{cite book |last=Massa |first=Joan |author-link= |date=2015 |title=Recull de conferències 2013 : 250 anys del Politar andorrà i 50 anys d'Andorra, el meu país |url= |location=Andorra |publisher=Societat Andorrana de Ciències |chapter=El Politar i nosaltres |page= |isbn=9789992061244 |ref=Mas15}}<br /> *{{cite web |url=https://www.elperiodic.ad/noticia/20098/landorra-del-segle-xxi-explicada-als-germanofons-i-per-un-austriac |title=L'Andorra del segle XXI explicada als germanòfons (¡i per un austríac!) |last= |first= |date=9 January 2012 |website= |publisher=El Periòdic d'Andorra |access-date=21 February 2016 |quote= |ref=Per12}}<br /> <br /> {{translated page|es|Literatura de Andorra|version=142605529|insertversion=1096608089}}<br /> <br /> [[Category:Catalan-language literature| ]]</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Catalan/Valencian_cultural_domain&diff=1096608297 2022-07-05T15:16:49Z

<p>Arkarull: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Sidebar with collapsible lists<br /> | name = Catalan/Valencian cultural domain<br /> | style = width: 22em; {{#if:{{{align|}}}|float: {{{align}}}; clear: {{{align}}};}}<br /> | bodyclass = hlist<br /> | title = {{nowrap|The [[Catalan language|Catalan]] / [[Valencian language|Valencian]]}} {{nowrap|cultural domain}}<br /> | titlestyle = line-height:1.2; font-size:140%;<br /> | expanded = {{{expanded|}}}<br /> | image = {{{image|}}}<br /> | caption = {{{caption|}}}<br /> <br /> | list1name = Language<br /> | list1title = Language<br /> | list1 = <br /> <br /> * [[History of the Catalan language|History]]<br /> * [[Catalan literature|Literature]]<br /> **[[Literature of Andorra]]<br /> * [[Catalan grammar|Grammar]]<br /> ** [[Catalan phonology|Pronunciation]]<br /> *** &lt;small&gt;[[Phonological history of Catalan|Phonetic history]]&lt;/small&gt;<br /> *** &lt;small&gt;[[Help:IPA/Catalan|IPA guide]]&lt;/small&gt;<br /> *** &lt;small&gt;[[Lists of spelling-to-sound correspondences in Catalan|Spelling-to-sound charts]]&lt;/small&gt;<br /> ** [[Catalan orthography|Orthography]]<br /> *** &lt;small&gt;[[Catalan alphabet|Alphabet]]&lt;/small&gt;<br /> *** &lt;small&gt;[[Catalan Braille|Braille]]&lt;/small&gt;<br /> ** [[Catalan morphology|Morpho-]][[Catalan syntax|syntax]]<br /> *** &lt;small&gt;[[Catalan nouns|Nouns]]&lt;/small&gt;<br /> *** &lt;small&gt;[[Catalan personal pronouns|Personal pronouns]]&lt;/small&gt;<br /> *** &lt;small&gt;[[Catalan verbs|Verbs]]&lt;/small&gt; (&lt;small&gt;[[Catalan conjugation|Conjugation]]&lt;/small&gt;)<br /> <br /> * ''[[Acadèmia Valenciana de la Llengua]]'' (AVL)<br /> * ''[[Institut d'Estudis Catalans]]'' (IEC)<br /> * ''[[Institut Ramon Llull|Institut]]'' and ''[[Fundació Ramon Llull]]'' (IRL &amp; FRL)<br /> <br /> | list2name = People<br /> | list2title = People<br /> | list2 = <br /> <br /> * [[Andorran people|Andorrans]]<br /> * [[Aragonese people|Aragonese]]<br /> * [[Balearic people|Balearics]]<br /> ** [[Ibizan people|Ibizans]]<br /> ** [[Majorcan people|Majorcans]]<br /> ** [[Menorcan people|Minorcans]]<br /> * [[Catalan people|Catalans]]<br /> * [[Northern Catalans|Roussillonese]]<br /> * [[Sardinian people|Sardinians]]<br /> ** [[Alguerese people|Alguerese]]<br /> * [[Valencian people|Valencians]]<br /> <br /> | list3name = History<br /> | list3title = History<br /> | list3 = <br /> * [[History of Andorra]]<br /> * [[History of Aragon]]<br /> * [[History of the Balearic Islands]]<br /> * [[History of Catalonia]]<br /> * [[History of Roussillon]]<br /> * [[History of Sardinia]]<br /> * [[History of the Valencian Community|History of Valencia]]<br /> <br /> * [[Crown of Aragon]]<br /> ** [[Principality of Catalonia]]<br /> ** [[Kingdom of Majorca]]<br /> ** [[Kingdom of Valencia]]<br /> * [[Catalan constitutions|Catalan Constitutions]]<br /> * [[Furs of Valencia|Valencian Law]]<br /> * [[Treaty of the Pyrenees]]<br /> * [[Nueva Planta decrees|''Nova Planta'' Decrees]]<br /> <br /> | list4name= Divisions<br /> | list4title= Geo-political divisions<br /> | list4 = <br /> * [[Andorra]]<br /> * [[Aragon]] ([[La Franja]])<br /> * [[Balearic Islands]]<br /> ** [[Ibiza]]<br /> ** [[Majorca]]<br /> ** [[Menorca|Minorca]]<br /> * [[Catalonia]]<br /> * [[Murcia]] ([[Carche|El Carxe]])<br /> * [[Occitania (administrative region)|Occitania]]<br /> * [[Sardinia]] ([[Alghero|L'Alguer]])<br /> * [[Valencian Community|Valencia]] &lt;br/&gt; ''See [[Catalan Countries]]''<br /> <br /> | list5name = Politics<br /> | list5title = Government and politics<br /> | list5 = <br /> * [[General Council of Andorra]] ([[Politics of Andorra|Politics]])<br /> * [[Cortes of Aragon|Courts of Aragon]] ([[Politics of Aragon|Politics]])<br /> * [[Balearic Islands|Government of the Balearic Islands]] ([[Politics of the Balearic Islands|Politics]])<br /> * [[Generalitat de Catalunya|Generalitat of Catalonia]] ([[Politics of Catalonia|Politics]])<br /> * [[Departmental Council of Pyrénées-Orientales|General Council of the Pyrénées-Orientales]] ([[Politics of the Pyrénées-Orientales|Politics]])<br /> * [[Generalitat Valenciana|Generalitat of Valencia]] ([[Politics of the Valencian Community|Politics]]) &lt;br/&gt; ''See [[Catalan nationalism|Catalan]] and [[Valencian nationalism]]''<br /> <br /> | list6name = Traditions<br /> | list6title = Traditions and symbols<br /> | list6 =<br /> * [[Catalan cuisine|Cuisine]]<br /> * [[Catalan myths and legends|Myths and legends]]<br /> * [[Catalan symbols|Symbols]]<br /> * [[Traditions of Catalonia|Traditions]]<br /> <br /> * ''[[Caganer]]''<br /> * ''[[Castell]]s''<br /> * ''[[Correfoc]]''<br /> * ''[[Falles]]''<br /> * ''[[Bonfires of Saint John|Fogueres de Sant Joan]]''<br /> * ''[[Gigantes y cabezudos|Gegants i capgrossos]]''<br /> * ''[[Moros y cristianos|Moros i cristians]]''<br /> * ''[[Muixeranga]]''<br /> * ''[[Saint George's Day#Spain|Diada de Sant Jordi]]''<br /> * ''[[Sardana]]''<br /> * ''[[Tió de Nadal]]''<br /> * ''[[Coca (pastry)|Coca]]''<br /> * ''[[Ensaïmada]]''<br /> * ''[[Pa amb tomàquet]]''<br /> * ''[[Paella]]''<br /> <br /> | list7name = Arts<br /> | list7title = Arts<br /> | list7 = <br /> <br /> * [[Antoni Gaudí]]<br /> * [[Antoni Tàpies]]<br /> * [[Joan Miró]]<br /> * [[Joaquín Sorolla|Joaquim Sorolla]]<br /> * [[Salvador Dalí]]<br /> <br /> * [[Catalan literature|Literature]]<br /> ** ''[[Golden Age of Valencia|Segle d'or]]''<br /> ** ''[[La Decadència|Decadència]]''<br /> ** ''[[Renaixença]]''<br /> ** ''[[Modernisme]]''<br /> ** ''[[Noucentisme]]''<br /> <br /> * [[Catalan music|Music]]<br /> ** ''[[Nova cançó]]''<br /> ** ''[[Rock català]]''<br /> ** ''[[Catalan rumba|Rumba catalana]]''<br /> | below =<br /> <br /> }}&lt;noinclude&gt;<br /> [[Category:Catalonia templates]]<br /> [[Category:Catalan navigational boxes]]<br /> &lt;/noinclude&gt;</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Literature_of_Andorra&diff=1096608089 2022-07-05T15:15:17Z

<p>Arkarull: </p> <hr /> <div>The '''literature of Andorra''' it is part of [[Catalan literature]], that is, of literature in the [[Catalan language]]. It is the [[literature]] represented by the writings created in the [[Andorra|Principality of Andorra]] or by Andorran authors.<br /> <br /> == The beginnings of Andorran literature ==<br /> <br /> The ''Encyclopedic Dictionary of Andorra'', by [[Àlvar Valls]], presents the image of a literature that already produced its first works in the 18th century, with the ''[[Manual Digest]]'' by [[Antoni Fiter i Rossell]] and the ''Politar Andorrà'' by [[Antoni Puig]]. The ''Manual Digest'' &quot;is a &quot;compendium of the historical and institutional reality and of the uses and customs of Andorra followed by a compilation of annotated maxims, which is considered one of the most important books of its kind in the Catalan language of the 18th century and that for more than three centuries has been a source of reference and a behavioral guide for the rulers of Andorra and Andorrans in general.&quot; (Vals, 259). In the 19th century, religious works stand out and [[travel literature]] also appears, especially written by foreigners.<br /> <br /> === Manual Digest ===<br /> <br /> The book by '''Antoni Fiter i Rossell''' is entitled ''Manual Digest de las Valls neutras de Andorra, en lo qual se tracta de sa Antiguitat, Govern y Religio, de sos Privilegis, Usos, Preheminencias y Prerrogativas''. It is an eminent work of literature in the Catalan language of the 18th century. For more than three centuries it was used as a manual for the governors of the principality, as for the inhabitants of the Valleys. The book was kept in the [[Casa de la Vall]], the central place of the [[General Council (Andorra)|General Council of Andorra]]. In 1987 the General Council published a facsimile&lt;ref&gt;[[#Fit87|Fiter Rossell 1987]]&lt;/ref&gt; and in 2000 the Manual Digest was published as a pocket book.&lt;ref&gt;[[#Can98|Canturri 1998]]: 79-80&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> <br /> === Historical and institutional works ===<br /> <br /> In 1763 Antoni Puig published the ''Politar Andorrà''. Puig was a [[Priesthood in the Catholic Church|priest]] in [[Escaldes-Engordany]]. This book is a kind of reduced version of the ''Manual Digest'', but it also had a great influence on Andorran society.&lt;ref&gt;[[#Mas15|Massa 2015]]: 419-426&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> <br /> Until the 19th century, the tradition of historical and institutional manuals continued. It is worth mentioning the ''Relació sobre la vall de Andorra'' of 1838, by the [[Dominican Order|Dominican brother]] [[Tomás Junoy]]&lt;ref&gt;[[#Fer14|Fernández González 2014]]&lt;/ref&gt; and ''Història de Nostra [[Our Lady of Meritxell|Senyora de Meritxell]]'' of 1874, written by the [[Society of Jesus|Jesuit]] [[Luis Ignasi Fiter i Cava]] who in the principality published the book [[anonymously]].<br /> <br /> == Travel literature ==<br /> <br /> At the end of the 18th century, a literature known as '''travel literature''' was formed. Typically, the works of this literature were not written by Andorrans but by foreign travelers, especially from [[France]], [[Spain]] or the [[United States]]. Àlvar Valls Oliva distinguishes the authors into three groups:<br /> <br /> 1) Officials from neighboring states.<br /> 2) Romantic travelers or utopians.<br /> 3) Catalan travelers.<br /> <br /> [[Francisco de Zamora]], who in his story ''Diary of trips made in Catalonia'' writes extensively about Andorra; [[Pascual Madoz]], who in the ''Geographical, statistical and historical dictionary of Spain and its overseas possessions'' also includes a chronicle of the Pyrenean country.<br /> <br /> The Spanish soldier [[Antoni Valls]] published in 1820 in [[Barcelona]] the book ''Memory on the sovereignty that corresponds to the Spanish Nation'', where he recommends the annexation of Andorra by Spain. The political answer appeared three years later by the French [[Monarchism in France|monarchist]] [[Pierre-Roch Roussillou]] who wrote the book ''De l'Andorre (About Andorra)'', at the same time the first complete monograph on the principality.<br /> <br /> For romantic travelers and American and French [[Utopia|utopians]], Andorra was an isolated, exotic and sometimes strange country. The French [[Victorin Vidal]] wrote ''L'Andorre'' in 1866, and [[Marcel Chevalier]] presented the first map of the Andorran valleys. [[Gaston Vuillier]] published ''Le val de Andorre'' in 1888. The Americans [[Bayard Taylor]] with ''The Republic of the Pyrenees'' in 1867 and ''The Hidden Republic'' in 1911 as well as [[Lee Meriwether (author)|Lee Meriwether]] with ''Seeing Europe by automobile'', also in 1911. In 1933, the French [[Gaston Combarnous]] published ''The valleys of Andorra'' and in 1937 [[Imogene Warder]] published ''On foot through Andorra''.<br /> <br /> The accounts of [[catalonia|Catalan travelers]] around 1900 show quite similar cultural interests. [[Joseph Aladern]] published the ''Cartas andorranas'' in 1892. Other important authors are [[Valentí Almirall i Llozer|Valentí Almirall]], [[Salvador Armet]], [[Artur Osona]] and [[Jacint Verdaguer]].<br /> <br /> In the 20th century, some authors chose the principality as the subject of their works, especially in [[French literature|French]] and [[Catalan literature]]. In addition, essays were published such as the ''Llibre d'Andorra'' by [[Lluís Capdevila]] in 1958, the ''Glossari andorrà'' by [[Josep Fontbernat]] in 1966, as well as the essays by the Catalan writer [[Josep Pla]], published in 1943, 1959 and 1973.<br /> <br /> The ''L'Andorra dels viatgers'' series once again presents the old travel texts, edited by contemporary authors, for example [[Albert Villaró]]. Today, despite the fact that the Principality of Andorra has a modern circulation network and is connected to the international media, only a few books about Andorra are written by foreign writers. One example is the [[Austria|Austrian]] author [[Klaus Ebner]] who published the essay ''Andorranische Impressionen (Andorran Impressions)'' at the Wieser publishing house in [[Carinthia]]. The writer [[Alfred Llahí Segalàs]] recounted the passage of [[Josemaría Escrivá|Saint Josemaría Escrivá de Balaguer]] through the Principality of Andorra in 1937, in his book ''Andorra: host soil'' (2007). On the other hand, the Andorran writer [[Joan Peruga]] chose Andorran travel literature, especially that of the 19th century, as the central theme of his 2004 novel ''The Invisible Republic''.&lt;ref&gt;[[#Per12|El Periòdic d'Andorra]]&lt;/ref&gt; <br /> <br /> == Contemporary literature ==<br /> <br /> &quot;Modern&quot; literature began in the 1980s and intensified as a result of the independence of the [[Condominium (international law)|condominium]] in 1993. The [[General Council (Andorra)|General Council of Andorra]], that is, the Andorran [[parliament]], and the new government began to decisively promote literature with calls, prizes and measures in schools. Today there are several Andorran authors who already have a remarkable reputation in the '''[[Catalan Countries|Països Catalans]]''', for example [[Teresa Colom i Pich|Teresa Colom]], [[Antoni Morell Mora|Antoni Morell]], [[Albert Salvadó]] and [[Albert Villaró]]. At the [[Frankfurt Book Fair]] in 2007, seven Andorran authors participated in the events. The La Puça bookstore in Andorra la Vieja has become an information center for the country's authors.<br /> <br /> === Historical novel ===<br /> <br /> Many of the prose writers have written historical novels during their careers, reflecting on the history of the condominium. Albert Salvadó seems an exception because on the one hand he writes historical novels and on the other hand he rarely deals with the past of his country.<br /> <br /> We find Andorran topics in Antoni Morell's novels in ''Seven Litanies of Death'' and ''[[Boris Skossyreff|Boris I, King of Andorra]]''; of Albert Villaró in ''The Year of the [[Franks]]''; by [[Joan Peruga]] in ''Last summer in [[Ordino]]'' and by [[Josep Enric Dallerès]] in ''Inside the border''.<br /> <br /> === Poetry ===<br /> <br /> Thanks to the initiatives of the Andorran government, a poetic field grew. [[Manuel Anglada i Ferran]] published scientific works and poetry; and personalities such as [[Manel Gibert]], [[Sícoris]], [[Robert Pastor]], [[Teresa Colom i Pich|Teresa Colom]], [[Ester Fenoll Garcia]] and [[Marta Repullo i Grau|Marta Repullo]] represent the world of Andorran poetry. Until recently Josep Enric Dallerès published only poetry; in 2007 he published his first novel. Teresa Colom i Pich, an economist by training and by profession, decided in 2004 to dedicate herself exclusively to writing.<br /> <br /> === Literary awards ===<br /> <br /> Many literary prizes have been created in the [[Catalan Countries]]. Due to [[minority language]] status and strong cultural awareness, the awards aim to discover new talent and allow authors to dedicate exclusive time to writing.<br /> <br /> Many of Andorra's well-known writers have been awarded. For example, Antoni Morell won the [[San Miguel de Engolasters essay prize]] and the [[Charlemagne Prize]] for novels in 1999; Albert Salvadó twice won the [[Nèstor Luján Prize]] for [[Historical fiction|historical novels]] (1998 and 2005), the [[Fiter and Rossell Prize]] (1999), the [[Planeta Black Series Award]] (2000) and also the Charlemagne Prize for novels (2002); Albert Villaró received the Anna Dodas Memorial Prize (1993), the Nèstor Luján Prize (2003), the Charlemagne Prize for novels (2006), the Josep Pla (2014) and the [[Prudenci Bertrana Prize]] (2015), and Teresa Colom received the Poetry Contest Prize from the Government of Andorra Public Library (2000), the [[Grandalla Poetry Prize]] from the [[Circle of Arts and Letters of Andorra]] (2000), the [[FNAC Talent]] (2009) for ''On tot és vidre'' (Pagès Editors), and the [[Maria Àngels Anglada Prize|Maria Àngels Anglada Narrative Prize]] (2016), for ''Miss Keaton and other beasts''.<br /> <br /> === Andorran authors ===<br /> <br /> * [[Manuel Anglada i Ferran]], 1918-1998<br /> * [[David Arrabal Carrión]], b. 1977<br /> * [[Pilar Burgués Monserrat]], b. 1958<br /> * [[Montserrat Cayuela i Bragulat]], b. 1953<br /> * [[Teresa Colom i Pich]], b. 1973<br /> * [[Josep Enric Dallerès]], b. 1949<br /> * [[Ester Fenoll Garcia]], b. 1967<br /> * [[David Gálvez Casellas]], b. 1970<br /> * [[Alexandra Grebennikova Vólkova]], b. 1974<br /> * [[Manel Gibert Vallès]], b. 1966<br /> * [[Ludmilla Lacueva Canut]], b. 1971<br /> * [[Juli Minoves Triquell]], b. 1969<br /> * [[Antoni Morell Mora]], b. 1941<br /> * [[Robert Pastor i Castillo]], b. 1945<br /> * [[Joan Peruga|Joan Peruga Guerrero]], b. 1954<br /> * [[Marta Repullo i Grau]], b. 1976<br /> * [[Iñaki Rubio Manzano]], b. 1974<br /> * [[Albert Salvadó|Albert Salvadó Miras]], b. 1951<br /> * [[Rossend Marsol Clua|Sícoris]], 1922-2006<br /> * [[Albert Villaró|Albert Villaró Boix]], b. 1964<br /> * [[Anneke van de Wal]], b. 1968<br /> <br /> <br /> == Professional representation and publishers ==<br /> <br /> The '''[[Association of Writers of the Principality of Andorra]]''' (AEPA) is the professional representation of Andorran authors. Since its foundation in 1995, the president is [[Antoni Morell Mora]]. The AEPA maintains relations with the [[Associació d'Escriptors en Llengua Catalana|Association of Writers in the Catalan Language]] and the [[PEN International|Catalan PEN]].<br /> <br /> After the [[World War II|Second World War]], a very intensive publishing activity was developed in the Principality of Andorra. At first the publishers produced books for Spain and France, books in [[Spanish language|Spanish]] and French, and most of them were religious publications. The publication of books in the Catalan language began during the 1960s and increased during the following decade and especially after the death of the [[Francisco Franco|dictator Franco]]. The first contemporary Catalan [[Bible]] was published and printed in Andorra by order of the [[Benedictines|Benedictine monks]] of the [[Santa Maria de Montserrat Abbey|Montserrat monastery]], in the graphic workshops of the '''Editorial Casal y Vall'''.&lt;ref&gt;[[#Fon04|Fonolleda 2004]]&lt;/ref&gt; <br /> <br /> At the end of the 1970s, publishers changed their strategy to publish books for the use of the resident population (at the same time the Andorranization of education was being established). That is why, above all, books were published in the Catalan language, but also tourist books in other languages.<br /> <br /> Of the hundred publishers founded since World War II (including author-publishers), the number has shrunk considerably. They publish primarily literature, administrative books and tourist works. In May 2011, the '''Associació d'Editors d'Andorra''' was created, made up of Editorial Andorra, Limites Editorial, Anem editors, Edicions del [[Diari d'Andorra]] and Fundació Julià Reig. Most of the books by Andorran writers are published by Catalan publishers.<br /> <br /> Recently, the publisher Trotalibros, which emerged from the YouTube channel and blog of the same name, is proving to be remarkably popular, both in Andorra and in Spain and [[Latin America]].<br /> <br /> == Notes ==<br /> <br /> {{listaref|1}}<br /> <br /> == References ==<br /> <br /> *{{cite book |last=Canturri |first=Pere |author-link= |date=1998 |title=Manual Digest : 250è aniversari |url= |location=Andorra |publisher=Govern d'Andorra. Ministeri de Cultura i Turisme |chapter=Història i llegenda del Manual Digest |page= |isbn=9789992002049 |ref=Can98}}<br /> *{{cite web |url=http://www.cultura.ad/images/stories/biblios/fra_tom.pdf |title=Fra Tomàs Junoy, “Lo Peripatètic Solitari” |last=Fernández González |first=Júlia |date=2014 |website= |publisher=Biblioteca Nacional d'Andorra |access-date=22 January 2016 |quote= |ref=Fer14}}<br /> *{{cite book |last=Fiter Rossell |first=Antoni |author-link= |date=1987 |title=Manual Digest |url= |location=Andorra |publisher=Consell General |chapter= |page= |isbn=9991380019 |ref=Fit87}}<br /> *{{cite web |url=https://www.cultura.ad/publicacions-sobre-llengua/ex-libris-casa-bauro/numero-7-2004 |title=L'Editorial Casal i Vall |last=Fonolleda |first=Pere Miquel |date=2004 |website= |publisher=Biblioteca Nacional d'Andorra |access-date= |quote= |ref=Fon04}}<br /> *{{cite book |last=Massa |first=Joan |author-link= |date=2015 |title=Recull de conferències 2013 : 250 anys del Politar andorrà i 50 anys d'Andorra, el meu país |url= |location=Andorra |publisher=Societat Andorrana de Ciències |chapter=El Politar i nosaltres |page= |isbn=9789992061244 |ref=Mas15}}<br /> *{{cite web |url=https://www.elperiodic.ad/noticia/20098/landorra-del-segle-xxi-explicada-als-germanofons-i-per-un-austriac |title=L'Andorra del segle XXI explicada als germanòfons (¡i per un austríac!) |last= |first= |date=9 January 2012 |website= |publisher=El Periòdic d'Andorra |access-date=21 February 2016 |quote= |ref=Per12}}<br /> <br /> [[Category:Catalan-language literature| ]]</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Literature_of_Andorra&diff=1096596663 2022-07-05T13:38:29Z

<p>Arkarull: ←Created page with 'The '''literature of Andorra''' it is part of Catalan literature, that is, of literature in the Catalan language. It is the literature represented by the writings created in the Principality of Andorra or by Andorran authors. == The beginnings of Andorran literature == The ''Encyclopedic Dictionary of Andorra'', by Àlvar Valls, presents the image of a literature that already produced its first works in the 18th century, with t...'</p> <hr /> <div>The '''literature of Andorra''' it is part of [[Catalan literature]], that is, of literature in the [[Catalan language]]. It is the [[literature]] represented by the writings created in the [[Andorra|Principality of Andorra]] or by Andorran authors.<br /> <br /> == The beginnings of Andorran literature ==<br /> <br /> The ''Encyclopedic Dictionary of Andorra'', by [[Àlvar Valls]], presents the image of a literature that already produced its first works in the 18th century, with the ''[[Manual Digest]]'' by [[Antoni Fiter i Rossell]] and the ''Politar Andorrà'' by [[Antoni Puig]]. The ''Manual Digest'' &quot;is a &quot;compendium of the historical and institutional reality and of the uses and customs of Andorra followed by a compilation of annotated maxims, which is considered one of the most important books of its kind in the Catalan language of the 18th century and that for more than three centuries has been a source of reference and a behavioral guide for the rulers of Andorra and Andorrans in general.&quot; (Vals, 259). In the 19th century, religious works stand out and [[travel literature]] also appears, especially written by foreigners.<br /> <br /> === Manual Digest ===<br /> <br /> The book by '''Antoni Fiter i Rossell''' is entitled ''Manual Digest de las Valls neutras de Andorra, en lo qual se tracta de sa Antiguitat, Govern y Religio, de sos Privilegis, Usos, Preheminencias y Prerrogativas''. It is an eminent work of literature in the Catalan language of the 18th century. For more than three centuries it was used as a manual for the governors of the principality, as for the inhabitants of the Valleys. The book was kept in the [[Casa de la Vall]], the central place of the [[General Council (Andorra)|General Council of Andorra]]. In 1987 the General Council published a facsimile&lt;ref&gt;#Fit87&lt;/ref&gt; and in 2000 the Manual Digest was published as a pocket book.&lt;ref&gt;[[#Can98|Canturri 1998]]: 79-80&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> === Obras históricas e institucionales ===<br /> <br /> En 1763 [[Antoni Puig]] publicó el ''Politar Andorrà''. Puig fue cura en [[Escaldes-Engordany]]. Este libro es una especie de versión reducida del ''Manual Digest'', pero tuvo también una gran influencia en la sociedad andorrana.&lt;ref&gt;{{Ref-libro|apellido=Massa|nombre=Joan|artículo=El Politar i nosaltres|publicación=Recull de conferències 2013 : 250 anys del Politar andorrà i 50 anys d'Andorra, el meu país|fecha=2015|páginas=p. 419-426|lugar=Andorra|editorial=Societat Andorrana de Ciències}}&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> <br /> Hasta el siglo XIX, la tradición de manuales históricos e institucionales continuaba. Cabe mencionar la ''Relación sobre el valle de Andorra'' de 1838 del dominico fray [[Tomás Junoy]]&lt;ref&gt;{{Ref-web|url = http://www.cultura.ad/images/stories/biblios/fra_tom.pdf|título = Fra Tomàs Junoy, “Lo Peripatètic Solitari”|fechaacceso = 22/01/2016|editor = Biblioteca Nacional d'Andorra|fecha = 2014|nombre = Júlia|apellido = Fernández González}}{{Enllaç no actiu|bot=InternetArchiveBot |fecha=2021 }}&lt;/ref&gt; e ''Historia de Nuestra Señora de Meritxell'' de 1874, escrito por el jesuita [[Luis Ignasi Fiter i Cava]] quien en el principado publicó el libro anónimamente.&lt;ref&gt;{{GEC| 0027114|Lluís Ignasi Fiter i Cava}}&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> <br /> == Literatura de viajes ==<br /> <br /> A finales del siglo XVIII se formó una literatura conocida como '''[[literatura de viajes]]'''. Típicamente, las obras de esta literatura no fueron escritas por andorranos sino por viajeros extranjeros, sobre todo de [[Francia]], [[España]] o de [[Estados Unidos]]. [[Àlvar Valls Oliva]] hace una distinción de los autores en tres grupos:<br /> 1) Funcionarios de los estados vecinos.<br /> 2) Viajeros románticos o utopistas.<br /> 3) Viajeros catalanes.<br /> <br /> [[Francisco de Zamora]], que en su relato ''Diario de los viajes hechos en Cataluña'' escribe extensamente sobre [[Andorra]], [[Pascual Madoz]], quien en el ''Diccionario geográfico, estadístico e histórico de España y sus posesiones de ultramar'' incluye también una crónica del país pirenaico.<br /> <br /> El militar español [[Antoni Valls]] publicó en 1820 en [[Barcelona]] el libro ''Memoria sobre la soberanía que corresponde a la Nación española'' , donde recomienda la anexión de Andorra por España. La respuesta política apareció tres años después por el monarquista francés [[Pierre-Roch Roussillou]] que escribió el libro ''De L'Andorre (Sobre Andorra)'', a la vez la primera monografía completa sobre el principado.<br /> <br /> Para los viajeros románticos y los utopistas estadounidenses y franceses, Andorra era un país aislado, exótico ya veces raro. El francés [[Victorin Vidal]] escribió ''L'Andorre'' en 1866, y [[Marcel Chevalier]] presentó el primer mapa de los valles andorranos. [[Gaston Vuillier[[ publicó ''Le val de Andorre'' en 1888. Son a mencionar los americanos [[Bayard Taylor]] con ''The Republic of the Pyrenees'' en 1867 y ''The Hidden Republic'' en 1911 así como [[Lee Meriwether]] con ''Seeing Europe by automobile'', también en 1911. En 1933 el francés [[Gaston Combarnous]] publicó ''Los valles de Andorra'' y en 1937 [[Imogene Warder]] publicó ''On foot through Andorra''.<br /> <br /> Los relatos de los viajeros catalanes hacia 1900 muestran intereses culturales bastante parecidos. [[Joseph Aladern]] publicó las ''Cartas andorranas'' en 1892. Otros autores importantes son [[Valentí Almirall]], [[Salvador Armet]], [[Artur Osona]] y [[Jacint Verdaguer]].<br /> <br /> En el siglo XX , unos autores eligieron el principado como tema de sus obras, especialmente en la [[Literatura de Francia|literatura francesa]] y [[Literatura en catalán|catalana]]. Además, se publicaron ensayos como el ''Libro de Andorra'' de [[Lluís Capdevila]] en 1958, el ''Glosario andorrano'' de [[Josep Fontbernat]] en 1966 así que los ensayos del escritor catalán [[Josep Pla]], publicados en 1943, 1959 y 1973.<br /> <br /> La serie ''L'Andorra dels viatgers'' presenta de nuevo los antiguos textos de viaje, editados por autores contemporáneos, por ejemplo [[Albert Villaró]]. Hoy, que el '''Principado de Andorra''' posee una red moderna de circulación y está conectado a los medios internacionales, sólo pocos libros sobre Andorra están escritos por escritores extranjeros. Un ejemplo es el autor austríaco [[Klaus Ebner]] que publicó el ensayo ''Andorranische Impressionen (Impresiones andorranas)'' en la editorial '''Wieser de [[Carintia]]'''.&lt;ref&gt;{{Ref-web |url=http://www.elperiodicdandorra.ad/cultura/16580-landorra-del-segle-xxi-explicada-als-germanofons-i-per-un-austriac.html |título=Article sobre el llibre de Klaus Ebner al Periòdic d'Andorra. |fechaacceso=2012-02-21 |fechaarchivo=21 de febrero de 2012 |urlarchivo=https://web.archive.org/web/20120221041851/http://www.elperiodicdandorra.ad/cultura/16580-landorra-del-segle-xxi-explicada-als-germanofons-i-per-un-austriac.html |deadurl=yes }}&lt;/ref&gt; El escritor [[Alfred Llahí Segalàs]] relató el paso de San Josemaría Escrivá de Balaguer por el Principado de Andorra en 1937, en su libro ''Andorra: suelo de acogida'' (2007). Del otro lado, el escritor andorrano [[Joan Peruga]] eligió la literatura de viajes de Andorra, sobre todo la del siglo XIX, como tema central de su novela ''La república invisible'' de 2004.<br /> <br /> == Literatura contemporánea ==<br /> <br /> La literatura «moderna» comienza en los años 1980 y se intensificó a raíz de la independencia del condominio en 1993. El [[Consejo General de Andorra|Consejo General de los Valles]], o sea el parlamento andorrano, y el nuevo gobierno comenzaban a fomentar decididamente la literatura con convocatorias, premios y medidas en las escuelas. Hoy hay varios autores andorranos que ya tienen una reputación remarcable en los '''Països Catalans''', por ejemplo [[Teresa Colom]], [[Antoni Morell]], [[Albert Salvadó]] y [[Albert Villaró]]. En la [[Feria del Libro de Fráncfort|feria del libro de Frankfurt]] en 2007, siete autores andorranos participaron en los eventos. La librería La Puça de [[Andorra la Vieja|Andorra la Vella]] se ha convertido en un centro de información para los autores del país.<br /> <br /> === Novela histórica ===<br /> <br /> Muchos de los prosistas han escrito [[Novela histórica|novelas históricas]] durante su carrera, en las que reflexionaban sobre la historia del condominio. [[Albert Salvadó]] parece una excepción porque por un lado escribe novelas históricas y por otro lado trata raramente el pasado de su país. Escribió la trilogía ''La sombra de Alí Bei'' que muestra el mundo del oriente islámico, ''La gran concubina de Amon'' y ''El maestro de Keops'' que lleva al Egipto antiguo, ''Los ojos de Aníbal'' describiendo la lucha romano-cartaginesa , ''El enigma de Constantino el Grande'' y ''El anillo de Atila'' sobre el imperio romano, campos de exterminio de los nazis , otra trilogía dedicada a Jaime I el Conquistador , donde recrea la edad media, ''El informe Phaeton'', donde se adentra en la historia universal...<br /> <br /> Se lee sobre tópicos andorranos en las novelas de [[Antoni Morell]] , en ''Siete letanías de muerte'' y ''Boris I, rey de Andorra'', de [[Albert Villaró]] en ''El año de los francos'', de [[Joan Peruga]] en ''Último verano en Ordino'' y de [[Josep Enric Dallerès]] en ''Frontera adentro''.<br /> <br /> === Poesía ===<br /> <br /> Gracias a las iniciativas del gobierno andorrano creció un ámbito poético. [[Manuel Anglada i Ferran]] publicó obras científicas y poesía; y personalidades como [[Manel Gibert]], [[Sícoris]], [[Robert Pastor]], [[Teresa Colom]], [[Ester Fenoll Garcia]] y [[Marta Repullo]] que representan al departamento de la poesía andorrana.<br /> <br /> Hasta hace poco tiempo [[Josep Enric Dallerès]] publicaba sólo poesía; en 2007 publicó su primera novela. Los libros de poesía son ''Amigo'' de 1987, ''Ojos de agua'' de 1988 e ''Islalba'' de 1995. La economista de formación y de profesión [[Teresa Colom Pich]], en 2004 decidió dedicarse exclusivamente a escribir. Sus libros son ''Como meses de junio'' de 2001, ''La temperatura de unos labios'' de 2002, ''Elegías del final conocido'' de 2005, ''Donde todo es cristal'' de 2009 y ''Mi madre se preguntaba por la muerte'' de 2012.<br /> <br /> === Premios literarios ===<br /> <br /> En los [[Países Catalanes]] se han creado multitud de premios literarios. Debido al estado de lengua minoritaria y a una fuerte conciencia cultural, los premios intentan descubrir nuevos talentos y permitir a los autores dedicarse por un tiempo exclusivo a escribir.<br /> <br /> Muchos de los escritores conocidos de Andorra han sido premiados. Por ejemplo [[Antoni Morell]] ganó el premio de ensayo San Miguel de Engolasters y el Premio Carlomagno de novela en 1999, [[Albert Salvadó]] ganó dos veces el Premio Nèstor Luján de novela histórica (1998 y 2005), el Premio Fiter y Rossell (1999), el Premio Serie Negra de Planeta (2000) y también el Premio Carlomagno de novela (2002), [[Albert Villaró]] recibió el Premio Memorial Anna Dodas (1993), el Premio Nèstor Luján (2003), el Premio Carlomagno de novela (2006), el Premio Josep Pla (2014) y el Premio Prudenci Bertrana (2015), y [[Teresa Colom]] recibió el Premio del concurso de Poesía de la Biblioteca Pública del Gobierno de Andorra (2000), el Premio Grandalla de Poesía del Círculo de las Artes y de las Letras de Andorra (2000), el Talento FNAC (2009) por ''On tot és vidre'' (Pagès Editors), y el Premio de Narrativa Maria Àngels Anglada (2016), por ''La señorita Keaton y otras bestias''.<br /> <br /> === Autores andorranos ===<br /> <br /> * [[Manuel Anglada i Ferran]], 1918-1998<br /> * [[David Arrabal Carrión]], n. 1977<br /> * [[Pilar Burgués Monserrat]], n. 1958<br /> * [[Montserrat Cayuela i Bragulat]], n. 1953<br /> * [[Teresa Colom Pich]], n. 1973<br /> * [[Josep Enric Dallerès]], n. 1949<br /> * [[Ester Fenoll Garcia]], n. 1967<br /> * [[David Gálvez Casellas]], n. 1970<br /> * [[Alexandra Grebennikova Vólkova]], n. 1974<br /> * [[Manel Gibert Vallès]], n. 1966<br /> * [[Ludmilla Lacueva Canut]], n. 1971<br /> * [[Juli Minoves Triquell]], n. 1969<br /> * [[Antoni Morell Mora]], n. 1941<br /> * [[Robert Pastor i Castillo]], n. 1945<br /> * [[Joan Peruga|Joan Peruga Guerrero]], n. 1954<br /> * [[Marta Repullo i Grau]], n. 1976<br /> * [[Iñaki Rubio Manzano]], n. 1974<br /> * [[Albert Salvadó|Albert Salvadó Miras]], n. 1951<br /> * [[Rossend Marsol Clua|Sícoris]], 1922-2006<br /> * [[Albert Villaró|Albert Villaró Boix]], n. 1964<br /> * [[Anneke van de Wal]], n. 1968<br /> <br /> <br /> == Representación profesional y editoriales ==<br /> <br /> La '''Asociación de Escritores del Principado de Andorra''' (AEPA) es la representación profesional de los autores andorranos. Desde su fundación en 1995, el presidente es [[Antoni Morell Mora]]. La AEPA mantiene relaciones con la [[Asociación de Escritores en Lengua Catalana]] y en el [[PEN catalán]].<br /> <br /> Después de la Segunda Guerra Mundial, una actividad editorial muy intensiva se desarrolló en el Principado de Andorra. Al principio las editoriales producían libros para España y Francia, libros en castellano y en francés, y la mayor parte eran publicaciones religiosas. Empezó la edición de libros en lengua catalana durante la década de 1960 y aumentó durante la década siguiente y sobre todo después de la muerte del dictador Franco. La primera Biblia catalana contemporánea fue publicada e impresa en Andorra por encargo de los monjes benedictinos del monasterio de Montserrat, en los talleres gráficos de la '''Editorial Casal y Vall'''.&lt;ref&gt;{{Ref-libro|apellido=Fonolleda|nombre=Pere Miquel|artículo=L'Editorial Casal i Vall|publicación=Ex-libris Casa Bauró|url=https://www.cultura.ad/publicacions-sobre-llengua/ex-libris-casa-bauro/numero-7-2004|fecha=2004|páginas=p. 27-31|lugar=Andorra|editorial=Biblioteca Nacional d'Andorra}}&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> <br /> A finales de la década de los setenta las editoriales cambian su estrategia para publicar libros para uso de la población residente (al mismo tiempo se estaba instaurando la andorranización de la enseñanza). Por eso se publicaban sobre todo libros en lengua catalana pero también libros turísticos en otras lenguas.<br /> <br /> De las cien editoriales fundadas desde la Segunda Guerra Mundial (incluyendo a los autores-editores), el número se ha reducido considerablemente. Publican primeramente literatura, libros administrativos y obras turísticas. En mayo de 2011 se creó la '''Associació d'Editors d'Andorra''' integrada por Editorial Andorra, Límites editorial, Anem editors, Edicions del Diari d'Andorra y Fundació Julià Reig. La mayor parte de los libros de los escritores andorranos se publican en editoriales catalanas.<br /> <br /> == Referencias ==<br />  <br /> *{{cite book |last=Canturri |first=Pere |author-link= |date=1998 |title=Manual Digest : 250è aniversari |url= |location=Andorra |publisher=Govern d'Andorra. Ministeri de Cultura i Turisme |chapter=Història i llegenda del Manual Digest |page= |isbn=9789992002049 |ref=Can98}}<br /> *{{cite book |last=Fiter Rossell |first=Antoni |author-link= |date=1987 |title=Manual Digest |url= |location=Andorra |publisher=Consell General |chapter= |page= |isbn=9991380019 |ref=Fit87}}<br /> <br /> {{listaref|1}}<br /> <br /> [[Categoría:Literatura de Andorra| ]]</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Arkarull/Books/Albania&diff=1095955090 2022-07-01T11:54:04Z

<p>Arkarull: /* Daŭri Source Book I */</p> <hr /> <div>{{saved book<br /> |title=<br /> |subtitle=<br /> |cover-image=<br /> |cover-color=<br /> | setting-papersize = a4<br /> | setting-toc = yes<br /> | setting-columns = 2<br /> }}<br /> <br /> == Albanian Literature ==<br /> === Daŭri Source Book I ===<br /> ;Context<br /> :[[Albanian literature]]<br /> :[[List of Albanian writers]]<br /> ;Writers<br /> :[[Rreze Abdullahu]]<br /> :[[Dritëro Agolli]]<br /> :[[Mimoza Ahmeti]]<br /> :[[Ylljet Aliçka]]<br /> :[[Gëzim Alpion]]<br /> :[[Valdete Antoni]]<br /> :[[Fatos Arapi]]<br /> :[[Lindita Arapi]]<br /> :[[Pjetër Arbnori]]<br /> :[[Aleksandër Stavre Drenova]]<br /> :[[Frang Bardhi]]<br /> :[[Marin Barleti]]<br /> :[[Eqrem Basha]]<br /> :[[Mario Bellizzi]]<br /> :[[Nafiz Bezhani]]<br /> :[[Ben Blushi]]<br /> :[[Pjetër Bogdani]]<br /> :[[Flora Brovina]]<br /> :[[Maria Antonia Braile]]<br /> :[[Dionis Bubani]]<br /> :[[Gjergj Bubani]]<br /> :[[Klara Buda]]<br /> :[[Pjetër Budi]]<br /> :[[Uran Butka]]<br /> :[[Gjon Buzuku]]<br /> :[[Martin Camaj]]<br /> :[[Nicola Chetta]]<br /> :[[Selfixhe Ciu]]<br /> :[[Constantine of Berat]]<br /> :[[Nelson Çabej]]<br /> :[[Aleks Çaçi]]<br /> :[[Andon Zako Çajupi]]<br /> :[[Thoma Çami]]<br /> :[[Spiro Çomora]]<br /> :[[Diana Çuli]]<br /> :[[Gabriele Dara]]<br /> :[[Adem Demaçi]]<br /> :[[Musa Demi]]<br /> :[[Girolamo de Rada]]<br /> :[[Ridvan Dibra]]<br /> :[[Dora d'Istria]]<br /> :[[Spiro Dine]]<br /> :[[Elvira Dones]]<br /> :[[Yahya bey Dukagjini]]<br /> :[[Pal Engjëlli]]<br /> :[[Rudi Erëbara]]<br /> :[[Nikollë Filja]]<br /> :[[Gjergj Fishta]]<br /> :[[Nezim Frakulla]]<br /> :[[Dalip Frashëri]]<br /> :[[Naim Frashëri]]<br /> :[[Sami Frashëri]]<br /> :[[Shahin Frashëri]]<br /> :[[Llazar Fundo]]<br /> :[[Mirko Gashi]]<br /> :[[Sabri Godo]]<br /> :[[Gregory of Durrës]]<br /> :[[Odhise Grillo]]<br /> :[[Luigj Gurakuqi]]<br /> :[[Fatmir Gjata]]<br /> :[[Kadri Gjata]]<br /> :[[Julia Gjika]]<br /> :[[Sinan Hasani]]<br /> :[[Ervin Hatibi]]<br /> :[[Rifat Hoxha]]<br /> :[[Shefki Hysa]]<br /> :[[Anilda Ibrahimi]]<br /> :[[Vera Isaku]]<br /> :[[Nikolla bey Ivanaj]]<br /> :[[Halil Jaçellari]]<br /> :[[Petro Janura]]<br /> :[[Irhan Jubica]]<br /> :[[Helena Kadare]]<br /> :[[Ismail Kadare]]<br /> :[[Hasan Zyko Kamberi]]<br /> :[[Veli Karahoda]]<br /> :[[Amik Kasoruho]]<br /> :[[Teodor Keko]]<br /> :[[Jeton Kelmendi]]<br /> :[[Skifter Këlliçi]]<br /> :[[Ardian Klosi]]<br /> :[[Jolanda Kodra]]<br /> :[[Musine Kokalari]]<br /> :[[Vedat Kokona]]<br /> :[[Dashnor Kokonozi]]<br /> :[[Aristeidis Kollias]]<br /> :[[Ernest Koliqi]]<br /> :[[Anastas Kondo]]<br /> :[[Fatos Kongoli]]<br /> :[[Faik Konica]]<br /> :[[Vath Koreshi]]<br /> :[[Eulogios Kourilas Lauriotis]]<br /> :[[Irma Kurti]]<br /> :[[Mitrush Kuteli]]<br /> :[[Teodor Laço]]<br /> :[[Natasha Lako]]<br /> :[[Skënder Luarasi]]<br /> :[[Fatos Lubonja]]<br /> :[[Luljeta Lleshanaku]]<br /> :[[Sejfulla Malëshova]]<br /> :[[Gjekë Marinaj]]<br /> :[[Petro Marko]]<br /> :[[Petrus Massarechius]]<br /> :[[Luca Matranga]]<br /> :[[Din Mehmeti]]<br /> :[[Vangjel Meksi]]<br /> :[[Esad Mekuli]]<br /> :[[Branko Merxhani]]<br /> :[[Mesihi of Prishtina]]<br /> :[[Migjeni]]<br /> :[[Ndre Mjeda]]<br /> :[[Betim Muço]]<br /> :[[Besnik Mustafaj]]<br /> :[[Gjon Muzaka]]<br /> :[[Faruk Myrtaj]]<br /> :[[Sulejman Naibi]]<br /> :[[Papa Kristo Negovani]]<br /> :[[Ndoc Nikaj]]<br /> :[[Fan Noli]]<br /> :[[Majlinda Nana Rama]]<br /> :[[Fadil Paçrami]]<br /> :[[Ludmilla Pajo]]<br /> :[[Pashko Vasa]]<br /> :[[Arshi Pipa]]<br /> :[[Aurel Plasari]]<br /> :[[Ali Podrimja]]<br /> :[[Lasgush Poradeci]]<br /> :[[Foqion Postoli]]<br /> :[[Iljaz Prokshi]]<br /> :[[Leon Qafzezi]]<br /> :[[Gjergj Qiriazi]]<br /> :[[Rexhep Qosja]]<br /> :[[Kadrush Radogoshi]]<br /> :[[Luan Rama (diplomat)]]<br /> :[[Musa Ramadani]]<br /> :[[Nijazi Ramadani]]<br /> :[[Francesco Antonio Santori]]<br /> :[[Giuseppe Serembe]]<br /> :[[Nokë Sinishtaj]]<br /> :[[Brikena Smajli]]<br /> :[[Xhevahir Spahiu]]<br /> :[[Sterjo Spasse]]<br /> :[[Luan Starova]]<br /> :[[Haki Stërmilli]]<br /> :[[Iliriana Sulkuqi]]<br /> :[[Halit Shamata]]<br /> :[[Sokol Shameti]]<br /> :[[Bashkim Shehu]]<br /> :[[Filip Shiroka]]<br /> :[[Stefan Shundi]]<br /> :[[Dhimitër Shuteriqi]]<br /> :[[Skënder Temali]]<br /> :[[Ismet Toto]]<br /> :[[Kasëm Trebeshina]]<br /> :[[Domenico Bellizzi]]<br /> :[[Hajro Ulqinaku]]<br /> :[[Giulio Variboba]]<br /> :[[Ardian Vehbiu]]<br /> :[[Naum Veqilharxhi]]<br /> :[[Eqrem Vlora]]<br /> :[[Ornela Vorpsi]]<br /> :[[Anila Wilms]]<br /> :[[Jakov Xoxa]]<br /> :[[Bilal Xhaferri]]<br /> :[[Dhimitër Xhuvani]]<br /> :[[Muçi Zade]]<br /> :[[Injac Zamputi]]<br /> :[[Tajar Zavalani]]<br /> :[[Petraq Zoto]]<br /> :[[Gjergj Zheji]]<br /> :[[Petro Zheji]]</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Arkarull/Books/Albania&diff=1095954947 2022-07-01T11:53:06Z

<p>Arkarull: ←Created page with '{{saved book |title= |subtitle= |cover-image= |cover-color= | setting-papersize = a4 | setting-toc = yes | setting-columns = 2 }} == Albanian Literature == === Daŭri Source Book I === :Albanian literature :List of Albanian writers :Rreze Abdullahu :Dritëro Agolli :Mimoza Ahmeti :Ylljet Aliçka :Gëzim Alpion :Valdete Antoni :Fatos Arapi :Lindita Arapi :Pjetër Arbnori :Aleksandër Stavre Drenova :F...'</p> <hr /> <div>{{saved book<br /> |title=<br /> |subtitle=<br /> |cover-image=<br /> |cover-color=<br /> | setting-papersize = a4<br /> | setting-toc = yes<br /> | setting-columns = 2<br /> }}<br /> <br /> == Albanian Literature ==<br /> === Daŭri Source Book I ===<br /> :[[Albanian literature]]<br /> :[[List of Albanian writers]]<br /> :[[Rreze Abdullahu]]<br /> :[[Dritëro Agolli]]<br /> :[[Mimoza Ahmeti]]<br /> :[[Ylljet Aliçka]]<br /> :[[Gëzim Alpion]]<br /> :[[Valdete Antoni]]<br /> :[[Fatos Arapi]]<br /> :[[Lindita Arapi]]<br /> :[[Pjetër Arbnori]]<br /> :[[Aleksandër Stavre Drenova]]<br /> :[[Frang Bardhi]]<br /> :[[Marin Barleti]]<br /> :[[Eqrem Basha]]<br /> :[[Mario Bellizzi]]<br /> :[[Nafiz Bezhani]]<br /> :[[Ben Blushi]]<br /> :[[Pjetër Bogdani]]<br /> :[[Flora Brovina]]<br /> :[[Maria Antonia Braile]]<br /> :[[Dionis Bubani]]<br /> :[[Gjergj Bubani]]<br /> :[[Klara Buda]]<br /> :[[Pjetër Budi]]<br /> :[[Uran Butka]]<br /> :[[Gjon Buzuku]]<br /> :[[Martin Camaj]]<br /> :[[Nicola Chetta]]<br /> :[[Selfixhe Ciu]]<br /> :[[Constantine of Berat]]<br /> :[[Nelson Çabej]]<br /> :[[Aleks Çaçi]]<br /> :[[Andon Zako Çajupi]]<br /> :[[Thoma Çami]]<br /> :[[Spiro Çomora]]<br /> :[[Diana Çuli]]<br /> :[[Gabriele Dara]]<br /> :[[Adem Demaçi]]<br /> :[[Musa Demi]]<br /> :[[Girolamo de Rada]]<br /> :[[Ridvan Dibra]]<br /> :[[Dora d'Istria]]<br /> :[[Spiro Dine]]<br /> :[[Elvira Dones]]<br /> :[[Yahya bey Dukagjini]]<br /> :[[Pal Engjëlli]]<br /> :[[Rudi Erëbara]]<br /> :[[Nikollë Filja]]<br /> :[[Gjergj Fishta]]<br /> :[[Nezim Frakulla]]<br /> :[[Dalip Frashëri]]<br /> :[[Naim Frashëri]]<br /> :[[Sami Frashëri]]<br /> :[[Shahin Frashëri]]<br /> :[[Llazar Fundo]]<br /> :[[Mirko Gashi]]<br /> :[[Sabri Godo]]<br /> :[[Gregory of Durrës]]<br /> :[[Odhise Grillo]]<br /> :[[Luigj Gurakuqi]]<br /> :[[Fatmir Gjata]]<br /> :[[Kadri Gjata]]<br /> :[[Julia Gjika]]<br /> :[[Sinan Hasani]]<br /> :[[Ervin Hatibi]]<br /> :[[Rifat Hoxha]]<br /> :[[Shefki Hysa]]<br /> :[[Anilda Ibrahimi]]<br /> :[[Vera Isaku]]<br /> :[[Nikolla bey Ivanaj]]<br /> :[[Halil Jaçellari]]<br /> :[[Petro Janura]]<br /> :[[Irhan Jubica]]<br /> :[[Helena Kadare]]<br /> :[[Ismail Kadare]]<br /> :[[Hasan Zyko Kamberi]]<br /> :[[Veli Karahoda]]<br /> :[[Amik Kasoruho]]<br /> :[[Teodor Keko]]<br /> :[[Jeton Kelmendi]]<br /> :[[Skifter Këlliçi]]<br /> :[[Ardian Klosi]]<br /> :[[Jolanda Kodra]]<br /> :[[Musine Kokalari]]<br /> :[[Vedat Kokona]]<br /> :[[Dashnor Kokonozi]]<br /> :[[Aristeidis Kollias]]<br /> :[[Ernest Koliqi]]<br /> :[[Anastas Kondo]]<br /> :[[Fatos Kongoli]]<br /> :[[Faik Konica]]<br /> :[[Vath Koreshi]]<br /> :[[Eulogios Kourilas Lauriotis]]<br /> :[[Irma Kurti]]<br /> :[[Mitrush Kuteli]]<br /> :[[Teodor Laço]]<br /> :[[Natasha Lako]]<br /> :[[Skënder Luarasi]]<br /> :[[Fatos Lubonja]]<br /> :[[Luljeta Lleshanaku]]<br /> :[[Sejfulla Malëshova]]<br /> :[[Gjekë Marinaj]]<br /> :[[Petro Marko]]<br /> :[[Petrus Massarechius]]<br /> :[[Luca Matranga]]<br /> :[[Din Mehmeti]]<br /> :[[Vangjel Meksi]]<br /> :[[Esad Mekuli]]<br /> :[[Branko Merxhani]]<br /> :[[Mesihi of Prishtina]]<br /> :[[Migjeni]]<br /> :[[Ndre Mjeda]]<br /> :[[Betim Muço]]<br /> :[[Besnik Mustafaj]]<br /> :[[Gjon Muzaka]]<br /> :[[Faruk Myrtaj]]<br /> :[[Sulejman Naibi]]<br /> :[[Papa Kristo Negovani]]<br /> :[[Ndoc Nikaj]]<br /> :[[Fan Noli]]<br /> :[[Majlinda Nana Rama]]<br /> :[[Fadil Paçrami]]<br /> :[[Ludmilla Pajo]]<br /> :[[Pashko Vasa]]<br /> :[[Arshi Pipa]]<br /> :[[Aurel Plasari]]<br /> :[[Ali Podrimja]]<br /> :[[Lasgush Poradeci]]<br /> :[[Foqion Postoli]]<br /> :[[Iljaz Prokshi]]<br /> :[[Leon Qafzezi]]<br /> :[[Gjergj Qiriazi]]<br /> :[[Rexhep Qosja]]<br /> :[[Kadrush Radogoshi]]<br /> :[[Luan Rama (diplomat)]]<br /> :[[Musa Ramadani]]<br /> :[[Nijazi Ramadani]]<br /> :[[Francesco Antonio Santori]]<br /> :[[Giuseppe Serembe]]<br /> :[[Nokë Sinishtaj]]<br /> :[[Brikena Smajli]]<br /> :[[Xhevahir Spahiu]]<br /> :[[Sterjo Spasse]]<br /> :[[Luan Starova]]<br /> :[[Haki Stërmilli]]<br /> :[[Iliriana Sulkuqi]]<br /> :[[Halit Shamata]]<br /> :[[Sokol Shameti]]<br /> :[[Bashkim Shehu]]<br /> :[[Filip Shiroka]]<br /> :[[Stefan Shundi]]<br /> :[[Dhimitër Shuteriqi]]<br /> :[[Skënder Temali]]<br /> :[[Ismet Toto]]<br /> :[[Kasëm Trebeshina]]<br /> :[[Domenico Bellizzi]]<br /> :[[Hajro Ulqinaku]]<br /> :[[Giulio Variboba]]<br /> :[[Ardian Vehbiu]]<br /> :[[Naum Veqilharxhi]]<br /> :[[Eqrem Vlora]]<br /> :[[Ornela Vorpsi]]<br /> :[[Anila Wilms]]<br /> :[[Jakov Xoxa]]<br /> :[[Bilal Xhaferri]]<br /> :[[Dhimitër Xhuvani]]<br /> :[[Muçi Zade]]<br /> :[[Injac Zamputi]]<br /> :[[Tajar Zavalani]]<br /> :[[Petraq Zoto]]<br /> :[[Gjergj Zheji]]<br /> :[[Petro Zheji]]<br /> ;Context<br /> ;Writers</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alfred_Bauer_Prize&diff=740011838 2016-09-18T14:33:43Z

<p>Arkarull: /* Prize Winners */</p> <hr /> <div>The '''Alfred Bauer Prize''' is an annual [[film award]], presented by the [[Berlin International Film Festival]], as part of its [[Silver Bear]] series of awards, to a film that &quot;opens new perspectives on cinematic art&quot;.<br /> <br /> ==Prize Winners==<br /> <br /> {| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> |-<br /> ! Year !! Film !! Director !! Nationality <br /> |-<br /> | 1987 || '''''[[Mauvais Sang]]''''' || [[Léos Carax]] || {{FRA}}<br /> |-<br /> | 1989 || '''''[[The Servant (1989 film)|The Servant]]'''''|| [[Vadim Abdrashitov]] || {{USSR}}<br /> |-<br /> | 1990 || '''''[[The Guard (1990 film)|The Guard]]'''''|| [[Aleksandr Rogozhkin]] || {{USSR}}<br /> |-<br /> | 1992 || '''''[[Infinitas]]''''' || [[Marlen Khutsiev]] || {{RUS}}<br /> |-<br /> | 1994 || '''''[[Hwa-Om-Kyung]]''''' ||[[Jang Sun-woo]] || {{KOR}}<br /> |-<br /> | 1996 || '''''[[Strangled Lives]]''''' || [[Ricky Tognazzi]] || {{ITA}} <br /> |-<br /> | 1997 || '''''[[Romeo + Juliet]]'''''|| [[Baz Luhrmann]] || {{AUS}}<br /> |-<br /> | 1998 || '''''[[Hold You Tight (film)|Hold You Tight]]''''' || [[Stanley Kwan]] || {{HK}}<br /> |-<br /> | 1999 || '''''[[Karnaval]]''''' || [[Thomas Vincent (film director)|Thomas Vincent]] || {{FRA}} <br /> |-<br /> | 2000 || '''''[[Boy's Choir]]'''''|| [[Akira Ogata (film director)|Akira Ogata]] || {{JAP}} <br /> |-<br /> | 2001 || '''''[[La Ciénaga (film)|La Ciénaga]]'''''|| [[Lucrecia Martel]] || {{ARG}} <br /> |-<br /> | 2002 || '''''[[Baader (film)|Baader]]''''' || [[Christopher Roth]] || {{GER}} <br /> |-<br /> | 2003 || '''''[[Hero (2002 film)|Hero]]'''''|| [[Zhang Yimou]] || {{CHN}} <br /> |-<br /> | 2004 || '''''[[Maria Full of Grace]]''''' || [[Joshua Marston]] || {{USA}} <br /> |-<br /> | 2005 || '''''[[The Wayward Cloud]]''''' || [[Tsai Ming-liang]] || {{TWN}}<br /> |-<br /> | 2006 || '''''[[The Minder]]''''' || [[Rodrigo Moreno]] || {{ARG}} <br /> |-<br /> | 2007 || '''''[[I'm a Cyborg, But That's OK]]''''' || [[Park Chan-wook]] || {{KOR}}<br /> |-<br /> | 2008 || '''''[[Lake Tahoe (film)|Lake Tahoe]]''''' || [[Fernando Eimbcke]] || {{MEX}} <br /> |-<br /> |rowspan=&quot;2&quot;| 2009 || '''''[[Giant (2009 film)|Giant]]''''' || [[Adrián Biniez]] || {{URU}} <br /> |-<br /> | '''''[[Sweet Rush (film)|Sweet Rush (Tatarak)]]''''' || [[Andrzej Wajda]] || {{POL}} <br /> |-<br /> | 2010 || '''''[[If I Want to Whistle, I Whistle]]''''' || [[Florin Șerban]] || {{ROM}} <br /> |-<br /> | 2011 || '''''[[If Not Us, Who?]]''''' || [[Andres Veiel]] || {{GER}}<br /> |-<br /> | 2012 || '''''[[Tabu (2012 film)|Tabu]]''''' || [[Miguel Gomes (director)|Miguel Gomes]] || {{POR}} <br /> |-<br /> | 2013 || '''''[[Vic and Flo Saw a Bear]]''''' || [[Denis Côté]] || {{CAN}}<br /> |-<br /> | 2014 || '''''[[Life of Riley (2014 film)|Life of Riley]]''''' || [[Alain Resnais]] || {{FRA}}<br /> |-<br /> | 2015 || '''''[[Ixcanul]]''''' || [[Jayro Bustamante]] || {{GUA}}<br /> |-<br /> | 2016 || '''''[[A Lullaby to the Sorrowful Mystery]]''''' || [[Lav Diaz]] || {{PHI}}<br /> |}<br /> <br /> ==References==<br /> {{reflist}}<br /> <br /> {{Berlin International Film Festival}}<br /> <br /> [[Category:Berlin International Film Festival]]<br /> <br /> {{film-award-stub}}</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fascist_Union_of_Youth&diff=484184957 2012-03-27T14:27:45Z

<p>Arkarull: </p> <hr /> <div>'''The Fascist Union of Youth''' ({{lang-ru|Союз Фашистской Молодёжи}}, ''Soyuz Fashistskoy Molodyozhi'') was the [[youth organization]] of the [[Russian Fascist Party]]. It was founded in 1936 in [[Harbin]], which consisted of all automatically members of the organizations VFP in age from 16 to 25 years.<br /> <br /> Ideology and tactics of the Union is entirely determined by ideology and tactics of the Russian Fascist Party. <br /> Admission to the Union was carried out automatically: all members of the organization VFP appropriate age, regardless of gender. Members of the Union remained part of the VFP.&lt;ref&gt;Окороков А. В. Фашизм и русская эмиграция (1920—1945 гг.). С. 175&lt;/ref&gt;&lt;ref&gt;[http://ivanov-petrov.livejournal.com/798555.html Русские фашисты в Китае]&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> <br /> The Union was divided into two groups, Junior and Senior, each of which had two levels, Second Level (Young Fascist) and First Level (Avangardisty). Members had to pass certain exams to advance to a higher level. Those who successfully passed to the second stage of the Union were enrolled in the [[Pyotr Stolypin|Stolypin]] Fascist Academy.<br /> <br /> The Union had cultural, educational, dramatic and philosophical circles, as well as sewing and language schools. The military and political sections were the most important ones in the Union. Structural units of the Union were branches of the Department of the [[Russian Fascist Party|VFP]]. The head of the Union was appointed by the Head of the VFP and the remaining leaders were appointed by the head of the Union. <br /> <br /> == Notes ==<br /> * ''The Russian Fascists: Tragedy and Farce in Exile, 1925-1945'' by John J. Stephan ISBN 0-06-014099-2<br /> * ''К. В. Родзаевский. [[Zaveshchanie russkogo fashista|Завещание Русского фашиста]]''. М., ФЭРИ-В, 2001 ISBN 5-94138-010-0<br /> * ''А. В. Окороков. Фашизм и русская эмиграция (1920-1945 гг.)''. — М.: Руссаки, 2002. — 593 с. — ISBN 5-93347063-5 <br /> <br /> == External links ==<br /> * [http://nationalism.org/rodina/history/rusfas.htm Russian Fascist Party] {{ru icon}}<br /> * [http://ivanov-petrov.livejournal.com/798555.html Русские фашисты в Китае] {{ru icon}}<br /> <br /> ==References==<br /> {{reflist}}<br /> <br /> {{Russian fascism}}<br /> {{Fascism movement}}<br /> <br /> [[Category:Anti-communist organizations]]<br /> [[Category:History of the Soviet Union and Soviet Russia]]<br /> [[Category:Manchukuo]]<br /> [[Category:Russian fascist parties]]<br /> <br /> <br /> {{fascism-stub}}<br /> <br /> [[es:Unión Fascista de la Juventud]]<br /> [[ru:Союз Фашистской Молодёжи]]</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Union_of_Fascist_Little_Ones&diff=482045648 2012-03-15T16:07:29Z

<p>Arkarull: </p> <hr /> <div>[[File:Kroshka.jpg|thumb|right|280px|Front page of the Fascist Little Ones newspaper - &quot;Kroshka&quot;]]<br /> The '''Union of Fascist Little Ones''' ({{lang-ru|Союз Фашистских Крошек}}, ''Soyuz Fashistskikh Kroshek'') was a [[youth organization]] of the [[Russian Fascist Party]]. It was founded in 1934 in [[Harbin]], and was open to &quot;Russian boys and girls who believe in God, love Russia and respect labour&quot;. <br /> <br /> The Union's declared goal was &quot;saving Russian children from the streets and denationalization impact, raising them for future Russia in the Fascist spirit of religion and nationalism&quot;. The Union's members were Russian emigrant children aged between 3 and 10. Their parent's letter affirming agreement was all that was needed to secure membership.<br /> <br /> ==Structure==<br /> The membership was organised into levels named (from bottom to top) &quot;Simple&quot;, &quot;Clever&quot;, &quot;Knowledgeable&quot; and &quot;Advanced&quot;. When a boy reached the age of 10 he moved to the [[Union of Young Fascists – Vanguard (boys)]], and a girl at that age moved to the [[Union of Young Fascists – Vanguard (girls)]].<br /> <br /> The Union groups were called Focus groups. Members of each group lived near each other or were students at one school or in one class. Several Focus groups were then members of a District, and several Districts within certain territorial borders made up a Department. <br /> <br /> Adult supervisors in the Union were the Focus Master (roughly, [[company (military unit)|company]] leader), the District Master, and the Department Supervisor. <br /> <br /> At the head of the Fascist Little Ones stood the Management Center Union, established by order of the Head of the [[Russian Fascist Party]]. <br /> <br /> Fascist Little Ones wore uniforms. Boys wore black shirts, a sword belt, and black trousers. Girls wore a black [[sarafan]] and white blouses.<br /> <br /> ==Publications==<br /> The Union published the newspaper ''Kroshka''. <br /> <br /> == References ==<br /> * Stephan, John J. ''The Russian Fascists: Tragedy and Farce in Exile, 1925-1945'' ISBN 0-06-014099-2<br /> * К. В. Родзаевский. ''[[Zaveshchanie russkogo fashista|Завещание Русского фашиста]]''. М., ФЭРИ-В, 2001 ISBN 5-94138-010-0<br /> <br /> == External links ==<br /> * [http://nationalism.org/rodina/history/rusfas.htm Russian Fascist Party] <br /> <br /> {{ru icon}}<br /> {{Russian fascism}}<br /> {{Fascism movement}}<br /> <br /> [[Category:Anti-communist organizations]]<br /> [[Category:History of the Soviet Union and Soviet Russia]]<br /> [[Category:Manchukuo]]<br /> [[Category:Russian fascist parties]]<br /> <br /> <br /> {{fascism-stub}}<br /> <br /> [[ru:Союз Фашистских Крошек]]<br /> [[es:Unión de los Pequeños Fascistas]]</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Test_of_Proficiency_in_Korean&diff=451338798 2011-09-19T15:09:53Z

<p>Arkarull: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Infobox Korean name<br /> | hangul = 한국어능력시험<br /> | hanja = 韓國語能力試驗<br /> ||rr=hangugeo neungnyeok siheom<br /> |mr=hangugŏ nŭngnyŏk sihŏm<br /> |}}<br /> '''TOPIK''', or '''Test of Proficiency in Korean''' ([[hangul]]: 한국어능력시험 [[hanja]]: {{linktext|韓|國|語|能|力|試|驗}}) is a [[Korean language]] test offered twice annually to foreigners in Korea and people studying Korean in other countries. TOPIK is administered by the Korea Institute of Curriculum and Evaluation (Hangul: 한국교육과정평가원 Hanja: 韓國敎育課程評價院).<br /> <br /> ==History==<br /> The test was first administered in 1997 and taken by 2274 people. Initially the test was held only once a year.&lt;ref&gt;{{cite web|url=http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2008/09/17/2008091761011.html|title=Applications for Int'l Korean-Language Test Double|publisher=The Chosun Ilbo|date=17 September 2008|accessdate=3 December 2009}}&lt;/ref&gt; In 2009, 180,000 people took the test.&lt;ref&gt;{{cite web|url=http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2009/09/11/2009091100859.html|title=The Growing Popularity of the Korean Language|publisher=The Chosun Ilbo|date=11 September 2009|author=Kim Hong-jin|accessdate=3 December 2009}}&lt;/ref&gt; The Korean government introduced a law in 2007 that required [[Koreans in China|Chinese workers of Korean descent]] who have no relatives in Korea to take the test so they could be entered in a lottery for [[Visa (document)|visas]].&lt;ref&gt;{{cite web|url=http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2009/04/117_43029.html|title=Korean Proficiency Test Getting More Popularity|author=Bae Ji-sook|publisher=Korea Times|date=12 April 2009|accessdate=3 December 2009}}&lt;/ref&gt;&lt;ref&gt;{{Cite web|url=http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/include/print.asp?newsIdx=1538|title=Test Standard Set for Korean-Chinese Workers|publisher=Korea Times|date=22 April 2007|accessdate=3 December 2009}}&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> <br /> ==Format==<br /> The test is divided into four parts: vocabulary &amp; grammar, writing, listening, and reading. There is currently no oral section. Two versions of the test are offered: standard (S)-TOPIK and the business (B)-TOPIK. There are three different levels of S-TOPIK: beginner (초급), intermediate (중급), and advanced (고급). Depending on the average score and minimum marks in each section it is possible to obtain grades 1-2 in beginner, 3-4 in intermediate and 5-6 in advanced S-TOPIK. In B-TOPIK the scores in each section (out of 100) are added together to give a score out of 400.&lt;ref&gt;{{cite web|url=http://www.topik.or.kr/sub01/2008_topik_en_01_a.html|title=Examination Guide|accessdate=3 December 2009|publisher=KICE}}&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> <br /> ==Testing locations==<br /> In addition to Korea, TOPIK is available in the following countries: Japan, Taiwan, China, Mongolia, Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia, Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, Iran, Pakistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Azerbaijan, USA, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Paraguay, Argentina, Germany, United Kingdom, Spain, Italy, France, Turkey, Czech Republic, Egypt, Belarus, Russia, Brazil and Cambodia.&lt;ref&gt;[http://www.topik.or.kr/sub04/sub04_1.php TOPIK]&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> &lt;ref&gt;[http://www.unive.it/nqcontent.cfm?a_id=75281 TOPIK testing site at Venice Ca' Foscari University, Italy]&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> &lt;ref&gt;[http://www.ucm.es/info/idiomas/examenes/examenescoreanotopik.htm TOPIK in Madrid&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> <br /> ==See also==<br /> *[[Korean Language Proficiency Test]]<br /> <br /> ==References==<br /> <br /> {{reflist}}<br /> <br /> ==External links==<br /> *(Korean with English page) [http://www.topik.go.kr TOPIK homepage]<br /> *{{ko icon}} [http://www.kice.re.kr KICE homepage]<br /> <br /> {{DEFAULTSORT:Topik}}<br /> [[Category:Korean language]]<br /> [[Category:Korean-language education]]<br /> [[Category:Korean language tests]]<br /> [[Category:Education in South Korea]]<br /> [[Category:Language certification]]<br /> <br /> <br /> {{korea-stub}}<br /> {{edu-stub}}<br /> <br /> [[de:Test of Proficiency in Korean]]<br /> [[es:TOPIK (examen)]]<br /> [[ko:한국어능력시험]]<br /> [[it:Test of Proficiency in Korean]]<br /> [[ms:TOPIK]]<br /> [[ja:韓国語能力試験]]<br /> [[pt:Teste de proficiência em coreano]]<br /> [[zh:韓國語能力考試]]</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Test_of_Proficiency_in_Korean&diff=451338737 2011-09-19T15:09:20Z

<p>Arkarull: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Infobox Korean name<br /> | hangul = 한국어능력시험<br /> | hanja = 韓國語能力試驗<br /> ||rr=hangugeo neungnyeok siheom<br /> |mr=hangugŏ nŭngnyŏk sihŏm<br /> |}}<br /> '''TOPIK''', or '''Test of Proficiency in Korean''' ([[hangul]]: 한국어능력시험 [[hanja]]: {{linktext|韓|國|語|能|力|試|驗}}) is a [[Korean language]] test offered twice annually to foreigners in Korea and people studying Korean in other countries. TOPIK is administered by the Korea Institute of Curriculum and Evaluation (Hangul: 한국교육과정평가원 Hanja: 韓國敎育課程評價院).<br /> <br /> ==History==<br /> The test was first administered in 1997 and taken by 2274 people. Initially the test was held only once a year.&lt;ref&gt;{{cite web|url=http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2008/09/17/2008091761011.html|title=Applications for Int'l Korean-Language Test Double|publisher=The Chosun Ilbo|date=17 September 2008|accessdate=3 December 2009}}&lt;/ref&gt; In 2009, 180,000 people took the test.&lt;ref&gt;{{cite web|url=http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2009/09/11/2009091100859.html|title=The Growing Popularity of the Korean Language|publisher=The Chosun Ilbo|date=11 September 2009|author=Kim Hong-jin|accessdate=3 December 2009}}&lt;/ref&gt; The Korean government introduced a law in 2007 that required [[Koreans in China|Chinese workers of Korean descent]] who have no relatives in Korea to take the test so they could be entered in a lottery for [[Visa (document)|visas]].&lt;ref&gt;{{cite web|url=http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2009/04/117_43029.html|title=Korean Proficiency Test Getting More Popularity|author=Bae Ji-sook|publisher=Korea Times|date=12 April 2009|accessdate=3 December 2009}}&lt;/ref&gt;&lt;ref&gt;{{Cite web|url=http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/include/print.asp?newsIdx=1538|title=Test Standard Set for Korean-Chinese Workers|publisher=Korea Times|date=22 April 2007|accessdate=3 December 2009}}&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> <br /> ==Format==<br /> The test is divided into four parts: vocabulary &amp; grammar, writing, listening, and reading. There is currently no oral section. Two versions of the test are offered: standard (S)-TOPIK and the business (B)-TOPIK. There are three different levels of S-TOPIK: beginner (초급), intermediate (중급), and advanced (고급). Depending on the average score and minimum marks in each section it is possible to obtain grades 1-2 in beginner, 3-4 in intermediate and 5-6 in advanced S-TOPIK. In B-TOPIK the scores in each section (out of 100) are added together to give a score out of 400.&lt;ref&gt;{{cite web|url=http://www.topik.or.kr/sub01/2008_topik_en_01_a.html|title=Examination Guide|accessdate=3 December 2009|publisher=KICE}}&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> <br /> ==Testing locations==<br /> In addition to Korea, TOPIK is available in the following countries: Japan, Taiwan, China, Mongolia, Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia, Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, Iran, Pakistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Azerbaijan, USA, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Paraguay, Argentina, Germany, United Kingdom, Spain, Italy, France, Turkey, Czech Republic, Egypt, Belarus, Russia, Brazil and Cambodia.&lt;ref&gt;[http://www.topik.or.kr/sub04/sub04_1.php TOPIK]&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> &lt;ref&gt;[http://www.unive.it/nqcontent.cfm?a_id=75281 TOPIK testing site at Venice Ca' Foscari University, Italy]&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> &lt;ref&gt;[http://www.ucm.es/info/idiomas/examenes/examenescoreanotopik.htm TOPIK in Madrid&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> <br /> ==See also==<br /> *[[Korean Language Proficiency Test]]<br /> <br /> ==References==<br /> <br /> {{reflist}}<br /> <br /> ==External links==<br /> *(Korean with English page) [http://www.topik.go.kr TOPIK homepage]<br /> *{{ko icon}} [http://www.kice.re.kr KICE homepage]<br /> <br /> {{DEFAULTSORT:Topik}}<br /> [[Category:Korean language]]<br /> [[Category:Korean-language education]]<br /> [[Category:Korean language tests]]<br /> [[Category:Education in South Korea]]<br /> [[Category:Language certification]]<br /> <br /> <br /> {{korea-stub}}<br /> {{edu-stub}}<br /> <br /> [[de:Test of Proficiency in Korean]]<br /> [[es:TOPIK (examen)<br /> [[ko:한국어능력시험]]<br /> [[it:Test of Proficiency in Korean]]<br /> [[ms:TOPIK]]<br /> [[ja:韓国語能力試験]]<br /> [[pt:Teste de proficiência em coreano]]<br /> [[zh:韓國語能力考試]]</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bologna_bottle&diff=374028196 2010-07-17T20:38:37Z

<p>Arkarull: </p> <hr /> <div>A '''Bologna bottle''', often used in [[physics]] demonstrations and [[Magic (illusion)|magic tricks]], is a [[Glass Bottles|glass bottle]] which has great external strength,<br /> <br /> The exterior is generally strong enough that one could pound a nail into a block of wood using the bottle as a [[hammer]], however even a small scratch on the interior would cause it to crumble.<br /> <br /> It is created by heating a glass bottle then slowly cooling the outside whilst rapidly cooling the inside. This causes the external strength and internal stress such that even a scratch on the inside is sufficient to shatter the bottle.<br /> <br /> The effect is utilized in several magic effects, including the &quot;Devil's Flask&quot;.<br /> <br /> {{DEFAULTSORT:Bologna Bottle}}<br /> [[Category:Glass bottles]]<br /> [[Category:Glass engineering and science]]<br /> [[Category:Glass physics]]<br /> <br /> <br /> {{Glass-engineering-stub}}<br /> <br /> [[es:Botella de Bolonia]]</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikiquette_assistance&diff=373591404 2010-07-15T08:49:49Z

<p>Arkarull: /* Eva Grossjean */</p> <hr /> <div>__NEWSECTIONLINK__<br /> <br /> [[Category:Wikipedia dispute resolution]]<br /> <br /> {{Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts/Beginning}}<br /> <br /> {{User:MiszaBot/config<br /> |archiveheader = {{archivemainpage|Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts}}<br /> |maxarchivesize = 200K<br /> |counter = 88<br /> |minthreadsleft = 1<br /> |minthreadstoarchive = 1<br /> |algo = old(5d)<br /> |archive = Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts/archive%(counter)d<br /> }}{{noindex}}<br /> <br /> [[Category:Non-talk pages that are automatically signed]]<br /> <br /> &lt;!-- NOTE: If the archive navbox needs a new row, update [[Template:Wikiquette alerts/Archive navbox]]. This must be done manually, but the process should be pretty self-explanatory once you open the template. --&gt;<br /> <br /> = Active alerts =<br /> <br /> == {{User|John Halloran}} ==<br /> <br /> {{archivetop}}<br /> {{Stale|1=No recent updates to the thread, so it seems either the behaviour has stopped or there's nothing to do here. &lt;span id=&quot;sig&quot; style=&quot;background:#FFFFC0&quot;&gt;'''[[User:Giftiger_wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Verdana&quot; color=&quot;#900000&quot;&gt;Giftiger&lt;font color=&quot;#FF0000&quot;&gt;Wunsch&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;]]''' [[User_talk:Giftiger wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Tahoma&quot; color=&quot;#0060A0&quot;&gt;[TALK]&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/span&gt; 10:03, 12 July 2010 (UTC)}}<br /> <br /> *:I think of it more as a failure of this board. The behaviour was ongoing and has only stopped as the editor in question has stopped editing. In future I'll take problems to ANI or elsewhere as the board seems to have outlived its usefulness, especially in such an egregious and obvious case as this. &lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Papyrus&quot;&gt;[[User:Verbal|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#C72&quot;&gt;Verbal&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;small&gt;[[User talk:Verbal#top|&lt;span style=&quot;color:Gray;&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/span&gt; 10:15, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> *:: I'm sorry, I can't agree. Perhaps the comment was a bit hard, but compared to the constant attacks you get in many discussions this is quite civil. In this case, reminding [[User:John Halloran]] about [[WP:NPA]] should have been enough. The &quot;attack&quot; is mild, prompted by the other users incorrect behavior and there is no repetition. I'm not an admin, but had I been there would have been no action. That said, I do agree that this should not have gone stale, it should have been closed as no action a long time ago. --[[User:OpenFuture|OpenFuture]] ([[User talk:OpenFuture|talk]]) 10:22, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> *::: Open, considering we are involved in a dispute where you have been very uncivil I'm not surprised by your reasoning. However, calling someone a religious fanatic, trying to ban them from a page, saying they are a vandal, saying they have no knowledge, questioning their qualifications, etc etc are clearly uncivil - per policy. It should have been met with at least a high level warning and probably a block. Calling this &quot;mild&quot; is disingenuous at best. I did nothing to prompt his attacks, except follow guidelines and policy, and my edits have stood review - to characterise them as &quot;incorrect&quot; is itself, incorrect - and note I gave reasons. &lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Papyrus&quot;&gt;[[User:Verbal|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#C72&quot;&gt;Verbal&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;small&gt;[[User talk:Verbal#top|&lt;span style=&quot;color:Gray;&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/span&gt; 10:29, 12 July 2010 (UTC) <br /> ===Complaint===<br /> This recent edit by an editor I have been in (civil, on my part) dispute with is going too far in my opinion: [https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AAstrology_software&amp;action=historysubmit&amp;diff=371583225&amp;oldid=371581983 &quot;Her 'top university' is probably a Christian school, and to a religious fanatic, the ends justify the means.&quot;] Although ridiculous, I don't consider the &quot;She&quot; part a personal attack - I also haven't claimed special authority based on qualifications.<br /> <br /> It shouldn't take long to review his edits, there haven't been many recently. We first &quot;crossed swords&quot; at the [[Astrology software]] article where I noticed it may be a copyvio of another page based on the other page's copyright date. Moonriddengirl dealt with this issue perfectly. John seems to have taken it as an attempt to get the article deleted. When the article was restored I attempted to clean it up, and was met with resistance by John - a major contributor who claims to have written the article along with others who are also, like him, the authors of astrological/horoscope software mentioned in the article. He then made six edits to the article undoing my copyediting with the edit summary &quot;Undid revision xx by Verbal Undo vandalism by biased user&quot; [https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w/index.php?title=Astrology_software&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=370840585 diff]. I was polite and explained that this wasn't vandalism and pointed John to the relevant policies, and even apologised that there were so many. In return he stated I shouldn't edit the article (&quot;user Verbal should be disqualified from editing this page&quot;,&quot;A person who knows nothing about the field should leave the decision of relevance up to those who do know.&quot;, etc), said wikipedia shouldn't be edited by High school students, says I should be too busy too edit wikipedia if I had a PhD (shows what he knows!), and then goes on to further question my credentials and compare me to Essjay.[https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w/index.php?title=Talk:Astrology_software&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=371400041 diff] He also keeps bringing up typos which seems a bit silly and is due to using a French keyboard at the moment. In all my replies and dealings with John I've been polite and civil. His last two actions were the post I first mention, which I feel goes too far, and an off topic discussion about a love of rules rather than knowledge.<br /> <br /> If this continues this editor may need to take a break. Opinions, advice, etc welcome. Thanks, &lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Papyrus&quot;&gt;[[User:Verbal|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#C72&quot;&gt;Verbal&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;small&gt;[[User talk:Verbal#top|&lt;span style=&quot;color:Gray;&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/span&gt; 19:38, 3 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::You already said on your discussion page that you were going to take a break in order to give birth to a child. [[User:John Halloran|John Halloran]] ([[User talk:John Halloran|talk]]) 20:31, 3 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::I don't think so. I did say elsewhere I was going to be a dad soon. I specifically haven't complained about the &quot;She&quot;, that's not a problem (unless you do it again now you know). Would you care to address the actual concerns, such as the clear implication that I am a religious fanatic? I've asked you on the talk page to remove that comment. Thanks, &lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Papyrus&quot;&gt;[[User:Verbal|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#C72&quot;&gt;Verbal&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;small&gt;[[User talk:Verbal#top|&lt;span style=&quot;color:Gray;&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/span&gt; 20:45, 3 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :I belive that the user may need mentoring. He seems to have some knowledge of the field, yet seems to be unable to crasp that that dose not give him the right to ignore rules about RS or OR.[[User:Slatersteven|Slatersteven]] ([[User talk:Slatersteven|talk]]) 19:50, 3 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::Agree: a mentor would probably be a good option here to help the user contribute constructively. As for the &quot;religious fanatic&quot; comment, a polite warning to [[WP:AGF|assume good faith]] and remember to maintain civility when participating in discussions wouldn't go amiss. &lt;span id=&quot;gw_sig&quot; style=&quot;background:#FFFFC0&quot;&gt;'''[[User:Giftiger_wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Verdana&quot; color=&quot;#900000&quot;&gt;Giftiger&lt;font color=&quot;#FF0000&quot;&gt;Wunsch&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;]]''' [[User_talk:Giftiger wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Tahoma&quot; color=&quot;#0060A0&quot;&gt;[TALK]&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/span&gt; 11:59, 5 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> *Still waiting for input. If my description was too long I will refactor. Basically, &quot;religious fanatic&quot; is going too far. &lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Papyrus&quot;&gt;[[User:Verbal|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#C72&quot;&gt;Verbal&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;small&gt;[[User talk:Verbal#top|&lt;span style=&quot;color:Gray;&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/span&gt; 08:28, 4 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> **Does no one have an opinion on this at all? &lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Papyrus&quot;&gt;[[User:Verbal|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#C72&quot;&gt;Verbal&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;small&gt;[[User talk:Verbal#top|&lt;span style=&quot;color:Gray;&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/span&gt; 11:51, 5 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ***Did you leave the user a polite message to remember to maintain civility before posting this here? I looked on their talk page but didn't see such a comment. This should always be the first action you take; don't forget that [[WP:WQA]] is here to render advice and opinions on civility issues and/or to refer the matters to other noticeboards. You should try to deal with the matter yourself before advice becomes necessary, and in this case a polite comment about maintaining civility or request to retract the statement that you are a &quot;religious&quot; fanatic would have sufficed unless the user refused to address your concerns civilly. &lt;span id=&quot;gw_sig&quot; style=&quot;background:#FFFFC0&quot;&gt;'''[[User:Giftiger_wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Verdana&quot; color=&quot;#900000&quot;&gt;Giftiger&lt;font color=&quot;#FF0000&quot;&gt;Wunsch&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;]]''' [[User_talk:Giftiger wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Tahoma&quot; color=&quot;#0060A0&quot;&gt;[TALK]&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/span&gt; 12:06, 5 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ****Yes I did, and I was polite to them on the article talk page and asked them to calm down. Would you actually like to read and respond to the problematic behaviour, or do you think it is fine? &lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Papyrus&quot;&gt;[[User:Verbal|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#C72&quot;&gt;Verbal&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;small&gt;[[User talk:Verbal#top|&lt;span style=&quot;color:Gray;&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/span&gt; 12:52, 5 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> All I can suggest is that you should have discussed the problem with the user and/or issued a level 1 npa warning and let that be that. [[WP:WQA]] is here to help resolve issues of incivility and exists only to render advice and/or refer the issue to a relevant noticeboard. Incivility is inevitably going to happen during the consensus-building process, and while I agree that calling someone a &quot;religious fanatic&quot; is a personal attack, IMO it's a pretty minor one and could have been dealt with via polite discussion and/or npa template until it became a more serious problem. &lt;span id=&quot;gw_sig&quot; style=&quot;background:#FFFFC0&quot;&gt;'''[[User:Giftiger_wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Verdana&quot; color=&quot;#900000&quot;&gt;Giftiger&lt;font color=&quot;#FF0000&quot;&gt;Wunsch&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;]]''' [[User_talk:Giftiger wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Tahoma&quot; color=&quot;#0060A0&quot;&gt;[TALK]&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/span&gt; 13:13, 6 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :Well this board is certainly useful. Thanks for nothing. The only advice is slap a template on them. Yes sir, that would have deescalated the problem. Sorry Giftiger, as I know your advice is well meant, but it is wrong and would have made the situation worse in this case. There is no point in my talking to them, as they have already said I should be banned and that I am a religious fanatic that should be ignored and talking to them makes it worse. &lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Papyrus&quot;&gt;[[User:Verbal|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#C72&quot;&gt;Verbal&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;small&gt;[[User talk:Verbal#top|&lt;span style=&quot;color:Gray;&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/span&gt; 21:16, 7 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::If you find that talking with the user isn't going to help, then I'd say just avoid them. While calling someone a &quot;religious fanatic&quot; isn't very pleasant, it's not really worthy of much more than a warning about civility. Just avoid them where possible, and if they make any particularly malicious remarks they could be taken to [[WP:AN/I]] at a later date. &lt;span id=&quot;gw_sig&quot; style=&quot;background:#FFFFC0&quot;&gt;'''[[User:Giftiger_wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Verdana&quot; color=&quot;#900000&quot;&gt;Giftiger&lt;font color=&quot;#FF0000&quot;&gt;Wunsch&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;]]''' [[User_talk:Giftiger wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Tahoma&quot; color=&quot;#0060A0&quot;&gt;[TALK]&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/span&gt; 21:29, 7 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Off topic===<br /> <br /> Ummm, Verbal... if [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Verbal&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=371842311 this] is an &quot;accusation of bad faith&quot; - what exactly is [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts&amp;diff=371828614&amp;oldid=371828022 this]? I wouldn't [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=371836094 &quot;request opinions&quot;] on open threads if you're not prepared for responses that might not be to your liking. [[User:Doc9871|Doc9871]] ([[User talk:Doc9871|talk]]) 13:05, 5 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> *Doc9871, what's the relevance to this thread? Verbal, please don't collapse other people's comments since you have pretty clear motives for wanting to removing Doc's comments. It's not exactly relevant to the thread, but collapsing it should be at the discretion of an uninvolved party. &lt;span id=&quot;gw_sig&quot; style=&quot;background:#FFFFC0&quot;&gt;'''[[User:Giftiger_wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Verdana&quot; color=&quot;#900000&quot;&gt;Giftiger&lt;font color=&quot;#FF0000&quot;&gt;Wunsch&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;]]''' [[User_talk:Giftiger wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Tahoma&quot; color=&quot;#0060A0&quot;&gt;[TALK]&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/span&gt; 18:18, 5 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> **My clear motive is that it is off topic and rude. &lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Papyrus&quot;&gt;[[User:Verbal|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#C72&quot;&gt;Verbal&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;small&gt;[[User talk:Verbal#top|&lt;span style=&quot;color:Gray;&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/span&gt; 18:38, 5 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Verbal is on a personal vendetta here. Experienced users (or at least users trying to throw their weight around policing articles) going after inexperienced users over petty breaches of wikiquette is a rather pathetic spectacle in this editor's opinion. --[[User:Dbachmann|dab]] &lt;small&gt;[[User_talk:Dbachmann|(𒁳)]]&lt;/small&gt; 10:43, 6 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :This is not true. Being called a &quot;religious fanatic&quot; (despite never mentioning religion!) when I have been polite and helpful is clearly a problem. You put this comment in the right section at least. &lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Papyrus&quot;&gt;[[User:Verbal|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#C72&quot;&gt;Verbal&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;small&gt;[[User talk:Verbal#top|&lt;span style=&quot;color:Gray;&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/span&gt; 13:08, 6 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> {{archivebottom}}<br /> {{collapse top|Unrelated to the thread and added after its archival}}<br /> The claim that I have been uncivil is incorrect. If you think I have, please start a WQA providing diffs of this supposed incivility. --[[User:OpenFuture|OpenFuture]] ([[User talk:OpenFuture|talk]]) 10:51, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :Please see Mass killings/communist regimes where I point it out and ask you not to do so in future. This thread is closed. See [[WP:DR]] if you want to take it further. &lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Papyrus&quot;&gt;[[User:Verbal|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#C72&quot;&gt;Verbal&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;small&gt;[[User talk:Verbal#top|&lt;span style=&quot;color:Gray;&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/span&gt; 12:06, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> {{collapse bottom}}<br /> <br /> == Wiki-Hounding, Cyberstalking and Bullying ==<br /> <br /> Wiki-Hounding, Cyberstalking and Bullying<br /> <br /> I am forced to object to the activities performed by Ckatz and Johnuniq against me in the following articles:<br /> <br /> {{la|Print on demand}}&lt;br&gt;<br /> {{la|InstaBook}}&lt;br&gt;<br /> {{la|Victor Celorio}}<br /> <br /> For a long time now, the editors in question have shown repeatedly a very strong bias against my entries in those articles. They follow me around and either erase my entries without explanation or they try to disqualify my entries in the articles in which I've participated by placing unfounded tags without any concrete proof or evidence. The implications of those tags are that there is something wrong or false with my entries, when every assertion I've made has been backed by independent secondary references that comply with the requirements set by Wikipedia. I have gone so far as to reference just about EVERY SINGLE LINE I write to make sure of this.<br /> <br /> However these editors, for unexplained reasons all of their own, have been going out of their way to erase my entries, tag the articles in which I participate and/or try to bully me into erasing perfectly valid secondary references. Ckatz has refused to answer my questions and has in turn tagged my articles, again, without any explanation at all. <br /> <br /> He has been assisted by another user named Johnuniq, who jumps in to answer my questions instead of Ckatz (they both may be the same person, I don't know). Johnuniq is the one that in those 3 articles tries to bully me into deleting valid secondary references for unexplained reasons.<br /> <br /> Both Ckatz and Johnuniq are not interested in suggesting any improvements to any of the the articles mentioned: they just try to block me and demean the articles.<br /> <br /> I have asked them politely why are they doing this and I have constrained myself from starting a little war of insertions and deletions as the policies of Wikipedia indicate.<br /> <br /> I have followed Wikipedia rules. My entries are limited to state the facts without any conclusion or statement from me, and I have included plenty of reliable references (Secondary and tertiary, as indicated by Wikipedia). <br /> <br /> It seems to me a blatant Wiki-Hounding, Cyberstalking and Bullying with an undeniable bias against me personally and/or against the subject of those articles for unknown reasons. Therefore I request formally an investigation into this matter. [[User:Llambert|Llambert]] ([[User talk:Llambert|talk]]) 18:30, 7 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> : You don't seem to have edited here in the last two months, and just glancing at your contribution history, I can't see where your contributions have been deleted, nor can I see where you've been threatened with being blocked. Can you be more specific, please? [[User:Dayewalker|Dayewalker]] ([[User talk:Dayewalker|talk]]) 18:37, 7 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :I think I'm going to have to agree with Dayewalker - I had a look at the talkpages, and there's just too much to look at. It looks like Johnuniq has tried to explain matters on a few of the talkpages, but I gather you have further issues? [[User talk:TFOWR|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#000&quot;&gt;TFOW&lt;/b&gt;&lt;b style=&quot;color:#F00&quot;&gt;R&lt;/b&gt;]] 18:57, 7 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::I am watching this page and so have noticed this report. If anyone has any questions please ask here. [[User:Johnuniq|Johnuniq]] ([[User talk:Johnuniq|talk]]) 03:32, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Dayewalker:<br /> I am sorry, but I never wrote that I had &quot;been threatened with being blocked&quot;, as you say. In regards to my not editing in the last few months, I followed Wikipedia guidelines and stopped editing so as to let matters cool off. <br /> <br /> The demands (what you call explanations) I was getting from Johnuniq, were not aimed at improving the article but on the contrary, to demean it. His intervention was prompted evidently by my asking questions to Ckatz, as to why he was tagging my articles and erasing my entries, so I have to assume he was speaking for him.<br /> <br /> Johnuniq followed me around, just as did ckatz, in all the articles I participated on, watching my entries and erasing or changing my entries. In the Print On Demand Article, for example, references and links I provided were changed or deleted. Furthermore, in the InstaBook article, Johnuniq demanded that I erase perfectly valid references to US patents and magazine articles, something which I found very strange. <br /> <br /> I think it is very telling that ckatz never answered my questions, and instead it was Johnuniq who came forth everytime, in any and all of the articles I participate. If they are not the same person, it is clear that one does the deed, and the other tries to back him up. [[User:Llambert|Llambert]] ([[User talk:Llambert|talk]]) 14:08, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> : I'm sorry, I still can't see what you're talking about. Looking at your contributions, it does look like Johnuniq reverted you once on [[Victor Celorio]], reinserting a COI tag here [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Victor_Celorio&amp;action=historysubmit&amp;diff=335728997&amp;oldid=335681340]. That was January 3rd of this year, over six months ago. Your contact with Johnuniq on [[Talk:Print on demand]] seems polite, and four months old. On [[InstaBook]], the discussion is also six months old and the only direct contact I see is when Ckatz reverted you here [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=InstaBook&amp;action=historysubmit&amp;diff=335911218&amp;oldid=335887895] to readd a COI and an ADVERT tag. <br /> <br /> : If you'll read [[WP:DIFF]], you can see how to make a DIFF of a particular edit, as I've done above. It would help us understand what you're trying to say if you could give us specific instances of edits you have a problem with. [[User:Dayewalker|Dayewalker]] ([[User talk:Dayewalker|talk]]) 07:03, 9 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::Dayewalker, you are already mentioning some of the specific edits that I am complaining about, but let me ask you a couple of questions before we go on.<br /> <br /> ::1.- Do you think it is proper for an editor to tag the articles of another editor, with no proof whatsoever of his accusations? <br /> <br /> ::According to Wikipedia guidelines regarding COI tags it is not:<br /> <br /> :::&quot;Using COI allegations to harass an editor or to gain the upper hand in a content dispute is prohibited, and can result in a block or ban.&quot;<br /> <br /> ::Here is the complete quote:<br /> ::&quot;Dealing with suspected conflicted editors<br /> ::The first approach should be direct discussion of the issue with the editor, referring to this guideline. If persuasion fails, consider whether you are involved in a content dispute. If so, an early recourse to dispute resolution may help. Another option is to initiate discussion at WP:COIN, where experienced editors may be able to help you resolve the matter without recourse to publishing assertions and accusations on Wikipedia. Using COI allegations to harass an editor or to gain the upper hand in a content dispute is prohibited, and can result in a block or ban.&quot;<br /> <br /> ::Both ckatz and Johnuniq did NOT follow the guidelines to place a COI tag, and they did tag my articles precisely as a way to &quot;harass an editor or to gain the upper hand in a content dispute&quot;. ckatz did it on December 15, 2009, right after I deleted some unsourced entries I found in those articles, following Wikipedia guidelines. As a response to my deletion, ckatz tagged all of my articles. You can check the date on the tags. <br /> <br /> ::That is my entire point and the one that gave origin to this entire incident. And this is what I like to correct. If you still cannot &quot;see it&quot;, I'll be glad to provide you with the diffs.<br /> <br /> ::2.- Is there a time limit to request an investigation? I ask this because you keep mentioning that this happened some time ago and I don't see the relevance since the problem persists still. &lt;small&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Llambert|Llambert]] ([[User talk:Llambert|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Llambert|contribs]]) 19:46, 9 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/small&gt;&lt;!-- Template:Unsigned --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;<br /> :::It seems that a lot of the angst here is coming from whether or not the article should be tagged with a COI tag. So let me just ask this: Are you connected to the product in such a way that you would have a potential conflict of interest? &amp;mdash; [[User:E. Ripley|e. ripley]]\&lt;sup&gt;[[User talk:E. Ripley|talk]]&lt;/sup&gt; 19:51, 9 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::::See also [[WP:BOOMERANG]].--[[User:SarekOfVulcan|SarekOfVulcan]] ([[User talk:SarekOfVulcan|talk]]) 19:55, 9 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::::: In all honesty, if you're asking people to dig up diffs from last December and block or ban other editors, it's not going to happen. Looking at those articles, E. Ripley's question above about involvement and COI certainly seems to be a good one. Also, do you have any connection to the account {{user|Playa27}}? [[User:Dayewalker|Dayewalker]] ([[User talk:Dayewalker|talk]]) 20:06, 9 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::::::: Man, that internet is something. Nice call, ER. [[User:Dayewalker|Dayewalker]] ([[User talk:Dayewalker|talk]]) 20:25, 9 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::::::::Yes, I also would like to know if there is any connection between Llsmbert and Instabook, and between Llambert and Victor Celerio. If this isn't denied, I'm quite happy with the COI tag. Not that I'm unhappy with it now, mind you. What I am unhappy with is Llambert's complaining about it without commenting on any possible relationship. Makes it hard to AGF. &lt;small&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Dougweller|Dougweller]] ([[User talk:Dougweller|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dougweller|contribs]]) 20:58, 9 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/small&gt;&lt;!-- Template:Unsigned --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;<br /> <br /> <br /> ::Well, your responses are interesting, and I take it they mean that you all think that it is proper not to follow the guidelines set by Wikipedia. Wow! So the following question would be, why bother then with the rules and guidelines? <br /> <br /> ::And it is not angst: they are just questions. I don't understand the aggressive tone in the responses to my questions. <br /> <br /> ::By the way, the second part of the Wikipedia rules on how to handle COI, says the following.<br /> <br /> ::&quot;Wikipedia places importance on both the neutrality of articles and the ability of editors to edit pseudonymously. Do not out an editor's real life identity in order to prove a conflict of interest. Wikipedia's policy against harassment prohibits this. COI situations are usually revealed when the editor themself discloses a relationship to the subject that they are editing. In case the editor does not identify themself or their affiliation, reference to the neutral point of view policy may help counteract biased editing.&quot;<br /> <br /> ::So, according to the rules, what matters is the writing and the references provided in the article itself. Or are you going to ask me also if I wrote those press articles and magazines essays? Are you going to ask me if I have a connection to the encyclopedias and the New York Times and all the hundreds of articles that have been written about the subject, and a connection to all of the other editors that have contributed to it? Because the moment you ask about one, then you are asking about all of them. <br /> <br /> ::And no, I am not complaining about the tags themselves. The article has been tagged before. I am complaining about how those tags were used: as a response to my erasing unsourced material placed in the article back in December. That's it: pure and simple harassment. I didn't even add anything to the article back then: I just erased bad material, trying to keep the article clean as indicated by Wikipedia. And the response from ckatz was the tags and deletions, left and right.<br /> <br /> ::I must conclude by your responses that you all believe it is ok to tag articles as a weapon and just for the fun of it, instead of following the rules.<br /> <br /> ::And then you wonder why Wikipedia has such a bad reputation in academic circles...<br /> [[User:Llambert|Llambert]] ([[User talk:Llambert|talk]]) 00:12, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::Actually, Wikipedia has a bad reputation in academic circles because academic circles are mostly occupied my older people who are just now figuring out this brand new &quot;email&quot; thing and get us mixed up with &lt;s&gt;TVtropes, Facebook, and Encyclopedia Dramatica&lt;/s&gt; 4chan. Even when they know who we are, they don't understand that we're not an academic source, and never will be. We're general reference, major difference. You don't cite Wikipedia in a paper for the same reason you don't cite Encyclopedia Brittanica, it's either something you shouldn't need to cite (common knowledge) or something you should be going into more detail with, using a better source.<br /> :::Also, you may wanna check out [[WP:SPADE]]. There hasn't been any outing yet (just statements of suspicion and questioning regarding possible involvement), and the fact that you're not denying any involvement sounds kinda like [[WP:DUCK|&quot;quack quack&quot;]]. That you're bringing up the outing issue before anyone has actually revealed any private information about you does not look good for you. If you just said &quot;no, not involved, just concerned,&quot; that'd be one thing, but you completely duck the issue and try to hide behind [[WP:WIKILAWYERING|rules]]. [[User:Ian.thomson|Ian.thomson]] ([[User talk:Ian.thomson|talk]]) 01:20, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::::I am still waiting for an answer to my direct question. I'll state it again. Are you connected to the product in such a way that you would have a potential conflict of interest? &amp;mdash; [[User:E. Ripley|e. ripley]]\&lt;sup&gt;[[User talk:E. Ripley|talk]]&lt;/sup&gt; 02:41, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::Your response is great: calling me a duck makes everything right. <br /> <br /> ::So lets follow your logic: I followed the rules set by Wikipedia by cleaning an unsourced entry, while ckatz and Johnuniq did not. And because I am asking why the rules are created if they are not going to be followed by them you turn this against me by saying that I hide behind the rules?<br /> <br /> ::Wow. Brilliant logic.<br /> <br /> ::Again, I will quote from the Wikipedia rules that you don't seem to like (and that you don't respect since you have such a low opinion of Wikipedia itself):<br /> <br /> ::&quot;Primacy of basic content policies<br /> <br /> ::All text created in the Wikipedia main namespace is subject to rules covering criteria for articles (what Wikipedia is not); encyclopedic quality (verifiability and original research); editorial approach (neutral point of view); as well as the Wikipedia copyright policy. All editors are expected to stick closely to these policies when creating and evaluating material, and to respect the good faith actions of others who edit content to ensure it complies with these policies.<br /> <br /> ::Who has written the material should be irrelevant so long as these policies are closely adhered to. &quot;<br /> <br /> ::As long as a contribution is neutral and unbiased, there should not be any problem regarding who makes the contribution. And as it happened, the contribution that created this whole thing was my cleaning an unsourced entry, as it is REQUIRED by Wikipedia. <br /> <br /> ::Without conceding anything, lets assume that I do have a connection with the subject. So what? That doesn't erase the fact that ckatz and johnunique did NOT follow the rules set by wikipedia and used a COI accusation as a weapon in the article because they didn't like that I erased that unsourced entry. <br /> <br /> ::There are rules to dealing with a COI in Wikipedia before tagging an article and I did quote them in this space. <br /> <br /> ::So I was trying to uphold Wikipedia rules, while ckatz and Johnuniq did not, and you insult me and tell me that I am somehow wrong?<br /> <br /> ::As I said before: brilliant logic. [[User:Llambert|Llambert]] ([[User talk:Llambert|talk]]) 04:08, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::Yep, you're wrong. We do have guidelines, and you seem to want to pick and choose between them. One thing we don't do is block or ban something that is 'stale'. For instance, we have [[WP:3RR]], which as it says is &quot; a bright-line rule called the &quot;three-revert rule&quot; which is very often applied as a reason for blocks.&quot; But it applies to the last 24 hours, and we don't enforce it for something that is say six hours older than that (and thus hasn't been repeated in the last 24 hours). So no, we would not take any action here even if there had been anything serious to take action about several months ago - that was the appropriate time to complain. <br /> <br /> :::And there's another problem. You talk about &quot;my articles&quot;. You don't have any articles. You may have created them but they aren't yours. See [[WP:OWN]].<br /> <br /> :::Then there's your complaint about unsourced material. When you created the article [[Victor Celerio]], you wrote &quot; Victor Celorio foresaw the advent of what is now known as the internet&quot;. That's still in the article. It isn't sourced. Here [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Victor_Celorio&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=331532271] you added some more unsourced material with citation needed tags. What were you thinking? Adding material and asking others to source it is not the way we are meant to be writing BLPs. The article needs attention as it still has unsourced material - and then there's what looks like an attempt to use patents to show notability, another but more minor issue as Celerio passes our notability criteria.<br /> <br /> :::We are not going to take action on these stale complaints. You've now been asked about COI and are stone-walling. The COI tags shouldn't be removed. [[User:Dougweller|Dougweller]] ([[User talk:Dougweller|talk]]) 05:54, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::::Fresh eyes here - I have just read all this for the first time, and have no connection to anyone here whatsoever. Sure seems to me like the questions about the possible COI are at the heart of the matter. This seems an easy call... Without a direct answer from Llambert, or other new information, I would suggest leaving the tags and closing this thread due to the stonewalling. [[User:Jusdafax|Jusdafax]] 08:03, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::Wow. I obviously touched a nerve here. I am receiving so many false accusations is almost comical. Let me start by the most obvious one.<br /> <br /> :::Stonewalling: I am not stonewalling. Although I am under no obligation to do so, I thought I had already answered the question by saying that you can assume that I have contact with the subject.<br /> <br /> :::I will be glad to answer it to e. ripley more clearly: No, I don't get paid by anyone for editing this. I do not own shares in the company. I am and have been for many years a professor of history in a local college, and that is as much as I am willing to say about myself. Is there a potential COI? Yes, there is. But that is why I have always been extra careful about any edits I've made so as to comply with the Wikipedia rules since I became aware of them. I rarely do any editing directly in those articles except to clean vandalism or wrong entries. Which is what happened in December 2009. I cleaned an entry which was clearly wrong. So why aren't you asking the other guys what was their interest in the matter?<br /> <br /> :::Jusdafax says the the tags are at the heart of the matter, which is what I have been saying all along. Not the tags themselves, but the way they were used by ckatz.<br /> <br /> :::But Dougweller hurries to find me at fault in something and he makes a couple of big mistakes. The first one is the [[WP:3RR]] rule. I didn't claim that a [[WP:3RR]] aplied. My question was about the use of the COI tags as a harassment weapon, which is clearly NOT allowed by the rules. No ifs or buts.<br /> <br /> :::Sorry but no, I don't pick and choose rules. You are the one with the power to do so. Not me. To the best of my abilities I've followed all the indications and the guidelines in Wikipedia regarding these matters. And I've come here to express my disagreement, like I am supposed to do.<br /> <br /> :::The second is perhaps more serious mistake and makes obvious the intent to turn the tables on me by any possible means: Dougweller accuses me of writing the very same unsourced entry that I erased in December 09 for being plain wrong!<br /> <br /> :::WOW!<br /> <br /> :::His third accusation is wrong again: the patent was just another reference. Nothing else and nothing more. The text says InstaBook got patents and I provided the numbers of the patents as a reference. How is that wrong? Please explain it to me because I don't understand what is the big issue there. As a matter of fact somebody else is editing that article right now and asking for (guess what?) the citations for the patents.<br /> <br /> :::Your fourth accusation is correct. I meant to say my entries, not my articles. My apologies.<br /> <br /> :::However as I said before, if my action to clean the article as it is REQUIRED by Wikipedia provoked ckatz reaction with the tags, and I let six months pass by, following Wikipedia advice, how does that make the actions by ckatz less wrong? <br /> <br /> :::You say that you will take no action since I let those six months pass by and the whole thing is &quot;stale&quot;. Fine. I cannot do anything about it. But my actions followed precisely what the Wikipedia guidelines recommend: stop editing, walk away and then come back to ask the questions in these pages. <br /> <br /> :::I don't understand the hostility. You guys are getting all agitated for nothing, because frankly, from the beginning when I wrote to him, I was not asking nor expecting any specific action against ckatz except perhaps an explanation for his actions. <br /> <br /> :::I received none. And now you tell me that you don't care about giving me one either.<br /> <br /> :::That is fine too. <br /> <br /> :::But it seems to me that by trying to make me the guilty party here, and worse, by making it via false accusations and innuendos, you are diminishing the standard that Wikipedia should aim to reach. You are not harming me: you are harming Wikipedia. [[User:Llambert|Llambert]] ([[User talk:Llambert|talk]]) 18:33, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::: So you edited articles you admit you have a [[WP:COI|conflict of interest]] in, then got upset when the articles were tagged with a COI tag six months ago? Again, I'm not sure what you hope to accomplish with this. [[User:Dayewalker|Dayewalker]] ([[User talk:Dayewalker|talk]]) 22:53, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :::::Reading a bit more closely, it appears as if Llambert is saying the problem with the COI tag is not that it was placed, but that it used in some sort of harassing fashion. I'm a little confused about how you can be harassed by someone placing a COI tag, if you admit that you have a conflict of interest. Am I missing something? I'm not agitated or hostile, mostly just confused. Llambert, one of the things you should understand about the culture here is that many people who edit Wikipedia have a very strong, sometimes knee-jerk antipathy toward those who edit Wikipedia in order to further some business interest. That aside, when you have a conflict of interest, your edits on that subject are always going to receive more scrutiny than other edits might because your motives are automatically in question. That's why the policy recommends that you simply not edit articles on subjects about which you have a conflict of interest. Instead, you should propose changes on the talk page and allow non-involved editors to evaluate them for their appropriateness. I'm sorry if you feel that you have been treated poorly. Wikipedia's processes are rarely intended to be punitive and particularly do not contemplate punishing someone for minor infractions that occurred half a year ago or more (though, I make no judgment about what was or wasn't improper since I haven't evaluated it myself). Given that, what would you like to happen here? &amp;mdash; [[User:E. Ripley|e. ripley]]\&lt;sup&gt;[[User talk:E. Ripley|talk]]&lt;/sup&gt; 15:43, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::::: Thank you, E. Ripley, for reading more carefully what I wrote. I am sorry I didn't do it more clearly. Yes, I am complaining about the way the tags were placed. In other words, the abuse, not the use. <br /> ::::::In answering to your earlier question, I said that there is a &quot;potential&quot; COI. But potential is not the same as existing. As I understand it by reading Wikipedia guidelines, and is clear by any analysis, it only becomes a COI the moment I write something which is not factual, either positive or negative. According to Wikipedia, even the subjects themselves can correct their own pages as long as they remain neutral.<br /> ::::::My objection was, as I said before, that those tags were used as a response to a clean up I did, when somebody was placing wrong and defamatory information on those pages (the same wrong information Dougweller found objectionable and accused me of writing). And Wikipedia indicates that such information needs to be removed, no ifs or buts.<br /> ::::::Wikipedia has a guideline about those tags. If I placed any information that could be read as a COI, I would expect the other editor to follow the established procedure. <br /> ::::::But instead of that, those tags were slapped as a response to my clean up, and then some other entries I made someplace else were deleted, using those tags as an excuse in a circular way: I get accused in one place, and then I get dammed and convicted in another using that COI accusation as proof. That is when it became harassment from my point of view. Even here, the tag carries such a weight that I got slammed for asking questions about it even though an actual COI does NOT exist.<br /> ::::::I wrote a polite message to the other editor and asked why was he doing that and he ignored me. Instead of entering into an editing war I waited as suggested by Wikipedia and then I placed my question in these pages and I got angry responses in return.<br /> ::::::To answer your question: what I would like to see happening is for that editor(s) to be reminded that there are procedures that need to be followed for the common good of Wikipedia, that tags are not to be used as a weapon because the only one that is damaged is Wikipedia itself, not the editors. <br /> :::::: As I said several times, the only thing I did was some required cleaning following the rules. If those tags need to remain in place, then so be it. If not, then they should be removed, because they were not there before my clean up. [[User:Llambert|Llambert]] ([[User talk:Llambert|talk]]) 19:56, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == [[User:Pmanderson]] ==<br /> <br /> {{Stale|1=No response or help given. Raised on [[Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Pmanderson_persistent_breaking_of_WP:CIVIL.|AN/I]] instead. --[[User:OpenFuture|OpenFuture]] ([[User talk:OpenFuture|talk]]) 22:26, 14 July 2010 (UTC)}}<br /> <br /> [[User:Pmanderson]]s first &quot;interaction&quot; with me was him making a massive revert of things both me an others did, after discussion on the talk page, calling it &quot;Vandalism&quot;, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;action=historysubmit&amp;diff=368433033&amp;oldid=367650849], implying that all those behind the consensus including me was vandals. He continues to call me a vandal [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AList_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;action=historysubmit&amp;diff=370604402&amp;oldid=370535477], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;diff=next&amp;oldid=370605350], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AList_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;action=historysubmit&amp;diff=369946605&amp;oldid=369944453], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AList_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;action=historysubmit&amp;diff=369340961&amp;oldid=369340534], while generally refusing to engage in constructive debate. Lastly he calls me a liar, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AList_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;action=historysubmit&amp;diff=372608491&amp;oldid=371983720] and a POV-pusher, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;diff=next&amp;oldid=372628957], because I want his sources to support his edits, and don't want [[WP:OR]] or [[WP:SYN]] in the article.<br /> <br /> When he doesn't engage in direct attacks, he is rude and claims that I have &quot;pet definitions&quot; or particular political views and that I edit based on POV, and not on wikipedia policies. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AList_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;action=historysubmit&amp;diff=372634734&amp;oldid=372633811]<br /> <br /> I have tried to be patient, but my patience with his attacks and rudeness and general refusal to engage in serious debate (it's possible, but only after repeating my criticism several times, he will ignore it the first few times), and this situation is not just not acceptable any more.<br /> <br /> He also ignores/brushes off any warnings with &quot;keep off my talk page&quot;. So I can't warn him the normal way any more, hence this WQA. --[[User:OpenFuture|OpenFuture]] ([[User talk:OpenFuture|talk]]) 20:14, 9 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::Planting template after template on Pma's talkpage is far from &quot;the normal way&quot;, OpenFuture. Please see my post [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:OpenFuture&amp;oldid=372637904#Please_stop here]. [[User:Bishonen|Bishonen]] | [[User talk:Bishonen|talk]] 20:56, 9 July 2010 (UTC).<br /> :::&quot;Template after template&quot;? Pmanderson has broken Wikipedia policies, and I have warned him. Is that not how you are supposed to do it? Did I misunderstand something? --[[User:OpenFuture|OpenFuture]] ([[User talk:OpenFuture|talk]]) 21:02, 9 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::::Bishonen has on my talk page made some suggestions, mainly I should have brought Pmandersons personal attacks up much quicker instead of warning him. One warning should be enough apparently. I will heed his recommendations in the future. But it doens't change the fact that Pmanderson has repeatedly insulted me, and refuses to stop with the insults, making it very hard to conduct a constructive debate. --[[User:OpenFuture|OpenFuture]] ([[User talk:OpenFuture|talk]]) 12:22, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :The complaint of a foiled revert-warrior, who, having blanked most of [[List of wars between democracies]], and spent several days revert-warring against sourced restorations ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;diff=368823209&amp;oldid=368798159 16:43 18 June], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=368830335 17:21], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;diff=next&amp;oldid=368831694 17:43], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;diff=next&amp;oldid=369223451 21 June 04:13], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;diff=next&amp;oldid=369324794 09:14], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;diff=next&amp;oldid=369329083 10:18], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;diff=369760951&amp;oldid=369754268 23 June 16:23], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;diff=369875945&amp;oldid=369844624 24 June 07:42], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;diff=370364176&amp;oldid=370316014 27 June 05:42], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;diff=370535013&amp;oldid=370459586 28 June 04:23], etc., etc.) is now attempting any means to gain sympathy for his actions. <br /> <br /> :He has now found or made up a definition of democracy of his very own, and insists that a paper by the founder of [[democratic peace theory]] is not talking about democracies when it discusses &quot;elective governments&quot; with secret ballots and civil liberties. Reliable sources disagree with the point of view he is pushing (cited on the talk page), and he now comes here to wail over this content dispute. [[User:Pmanderson|Septentrionalis]] &lt;small&gt;[[User talk:Pmanderson|PMAnderson]]&lt;/small&gt; 20:29, 9 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::As we see, the claims that I have bad faith, and calling me revert-warrior etc continues. I have reverted some of his changes, yes, but always with explanations and accompanying discussion on talk page. There was been no revert-warring from my side. Many reverts has been because his sources do *not* support his edits, and he has afterwards come up with other sources (which are not available online, so I have not had time to find them and check them yet). As soon as I have not been able to verify the sources, I have let the edit stay. --[[User:OpenFuture|OpenFuture]] ([[User talk:OpenFuture|talk]]) 20:45, 9 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> And another one: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AReliable_sources%2FNoticeboard&amp;action=historysubmit&amp;diff=373082574&amp;oldid=373082381] (and as a followup [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard&amp;curid=11424955&amp;diff=373092787&amp;oldid=373092291]). He is not likely to stop. --[[User:OpenFuture|OpenFuture]] ([[User talk:OpenFuture|talk]]) 15:11, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Not targeting me this time at least, but still awfully rude: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=373267484]. --[[User:OpenFuture|OpenFuture]] ([[User talk:OpenFuture|talk]]) 15:03, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> And [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard&amp;curid=11424955&amp;diff=373273807&amp;oldid=373273281]. He really isn't going to stop. --[[User:OpenFuture|OpenFuture]] ([[User talk:OpenFuture|talk]]) 15:39, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Again: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;curid=6153139&amp;diff=373498963&amp;oldid=373491728] I'm giving up on getting any sort of response here. What is next? How do I raise this issue, I'm tired of getting insulted every day, it's a hinder to constructive debate. --[[User:OpenFuture|OpenFuture]] ([[User talk:OpenFuture|talk]]) 20:22, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :I recommend you bring it to [[wp:ani]] to be honest, bugger all can be done here [[User:Marknutley|mark nutley]] ([[User talk:Marknutley|talk]]) 20:50, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::OK, will do. --[[User:OpenFuture|OpenFuture]] ([[User talk:OpenFuture|talk]]) 20:58, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Biased editor ==<br /> <br /> {{NWQA|1=Already heavily admonished at [[WP:ANI]] and rightfully so ([[User talk:Bwilkins|&lt;font style=&quot;font-variant:small-caps&quot;&gt;talk→&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;span style=&quot;border:1px solid black;&quot;&gt;'''&amp;nbsp;[[User:Bwilkins|BWilkins]]&amp;nbsp;'''&lt;/span&gt;[[Special:Contributions/Bwilkins|&lt;font style=&quot;font-variant:small-caps&quot;&gt;←track&lt;/font&gt;]]) 12:13, 10 July 2010 (UTC)}}<br /> [[User:Bender176]] is biased against anonymous editors and will revert them regardless of the merits of the edits. He also insults editors. He labels anyone who disagrees with him or her as 'vandals'. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Bender176 his or her edits for the whole history]. [[Special:Contributions/129.120.176.206|129.120.176.206]] ([[User talk:129.120.176.206|talk]]) 01:14, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :False all the way around ladies and gentlemen please check my other contributions. I may make some mistakes but I cleaned my act up since then. People may disagree with me but that doesn't mean they're wrong. He's trying to [[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bender176&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=372670555| hound me]] because I reverted a few of his edits mistakenly [[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=BART_Police_shooting_of_Oscar_Grant&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=372669285| here]] and it's not because he's an anon either, I revert vandalism from [[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=GEICO_advertising_campaigns&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=372668626| registered editors]] as well. I even agreed to bury the hatchet but he disagreed. --[[User:Bender176|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;'''Bender176'''&lt;/font&gt;]] [[User talk:Bender176|&lt;sub&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;maroon&quot;&gt;'''Talk to me'''&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/sub&gt;]] 01:21, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::''you are anonymous and therefore you don't count'' You could at least say &quot;I'm sorry for saying that&quot;. [[Special:Contributions/129.120.176.206|129.120.176.206]] ([[User talk:129.120.176.206|talk]]) 01:23, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :::I did by saying &quot;[[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:129.120.176.206&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=372670720| let's bury the hatchet]]&quot; but YOU [[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:129.120.176.206&amp;diff=next&amp;oldid=372670770| refused to]], and I only meant that on my talk page because you have no right to edit war on it but on articles everyone has equal say. --[[User:Bender176|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;'''Bender176'''&lt;/font&gt;]] [[User talk:Bender176|&lt;sub&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;maroon&quot;&gt;'''Talk to me'''&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/sub&gt;]] 01:26, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::::New stuff goes at the bottom. [[User:Ian.thomson|Ian.thomson]] ([[User talk:Ian.thomson|talk]]) 01:59, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::::OK, looking through, I saw [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Superman_Returns&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=372669799 this]. Bender, that's not [[WP:VAN|vandalism]] (he's trying to '''help'''), that's unsourced [[WP:OR|commentary]]. I recommend looking at [[Wikipedia:Template_messages/User_talk_namespace]] some more. It's honestly a bit rude to lump all edit that aren't perfect together as vandalism. You should have gone with &lt;nowiki&gt;{{subst:uw-unsourced1|Superman Returns|subst=subst:}} ~~~~&lt;/nowiki&gt;, (same for [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=BART_Police_shooting_of_Oscar_Grant&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=372669285 this]), which would have left a message asking him to use sources in the future. You need to cool it with the vandalism warnings until [[WP:NOTIMPORTANT|you don't get so pissy about them]] and until you understand what actually does constitute vandalism. [[WP:BITE|Behavior like you've had towards 129.120.176.206]] was why you got blocked before.<br /> ::::129.120.176.206, please check out [[WP:CITE]], [[WP:RS]], and [[WP:OR]]. Your edit to Superman Returns was not vandalism, but it does not meet the standards for [[WP:RS|sourcing]], and I would have reverted it had I seen it. [[User:Ian.thomson|Ian.thomson]] ([[User talk:Ian.thomson|talk]]) 02:15, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :::::For the record, user has been indef'd [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&amp;action=view&amp;type=block&amp;page=User:Bender176]. [[User:Swarm|&lt;span style='color:black'&gt;&lt;b&gt;Swarm&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;sup&gt;[[User talk:Swarm|&lt;span style=&quot;color:blue;&quot;&gt;'''Talk'''&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; 02:00, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Walter Görlitz ==<br /> <br /> I am loathe to bring a matter here; I almost never do. However, {{user|Walter Görlitz}} is an editor who's found his way to the block of articles I normally edit and there has been some quite intense friction. He's fairly consistently [[WP:EW|edit warred]] and subsequently made on talk pages numerous [[WP:NPA|personal attacks]] and [[WP:AGF|assumptions of bad faith]], hasn't heeded my requests to cease such behaviour, and seems like he'll be active on the pages I'm at for some time. Hence, I'd like some assistance - either another voice or other voices he might listen to, some guidance, and/or general advice - in getting the atmosphere more collegial, for everyone.<br /> <br /> A sample of what I'm talking about follows:<br /> * Questioning my grasp of English:<br /> ** &quot;English comprehension as well?&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Micha%C3%ABlle_Jean&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=372701673]<br /> ** &quot;Don't place tags until you learn the Queen's English&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Walter_G%C3%B6rlitz&amp;diff=372692622&amp;oldid=372690291]<br /> ** &quot;English much?&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Micha%C3%ABlle_Jean&amp;diff=372689004&amp;oldid=372688155] <br /> * Accusations of bad faith:<br /> ** &quot;you have shown bad faith in this date format thing in the past&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Miesianiacal&amp;diff=372444744&amp;oldid=372439868]<br /> ** &quot;You came off looking badly in both cases... I'm saying that you don't operate in good faith. I have no need to control date formats: that seems to be your domain considering your history.... Seeing as how little you respect consensus, I doubt that discussing this will matter.&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Miesianiacal&amp;diff=372447687&amp;oldid=372446289]<br /> ** &quot;You edited in bad faith...&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Miesianiacal&amp;diff=372464476&amp;oldid=372463119]<br /> ** &quot;In total, your argument... is a lie based upon your lack of good faith editing and your blatant disregard for the rules you are clinging to.&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Victoria_Day&amp;diff=364521927&amp;oldid=364520561] With the added edit summary, &quot;red herring season.&quot;<br /> ** &quot;Reverted 2 edits by Miesianiacal identified as vandalism to last revision by Walter Görlitz&quot; [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Victoria_Day&amp;diff=357283177&amp;oldid=357281916] (A false accusation)<br /> ** &quot;Reverted 2 edits by Miesianiacal identified as vandalism to last revision by Walter Görlitz&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=David_Lloyd_Johnston&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=372447701] (A false accusation)<br /> ** &quot;I would prefer [[User talk:Miesianiacal]] to simply admit to making the changes and revert them...&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:David_Lloyd_Johnston&amp;diff=372449691&amp;oldid=372448820] (I hadn't made all the changes)<br /> ** &quot;The distinguishing &quot;that country's&quot; was edit-wared by [[User:Miesianiacal]]&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Micha%C3%ABlle_Jean&amp;diff=372689004&amp;oldid=372688155](I reverted once)<br /> ** &quot;Feel free to continue to obfuscate.&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Miesianiacal&amp;diff=372450292&amp;oldid=372448495]<br /> ** &quot;I'll wait for Miesianiacal to tell me that he's ignoring consensus before I escalate.&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Victoria_Day&amp;diff=365493643&amp;oldid=365492342]<br /> ** &quot;How about you stop showing [[WP:Ownership]]?&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Micha%C3%ABlle_Jean&amp;diff=372704427&amp;oldid=372703734] (After I'd agreed to a [[WP:3O|third opinion]] I'd sought)<br /> ** &quot;That was gracious losing. You thought you were right and made an appeal hoping to be vindicated. When it turns out that you were wrong you actually argued with those called to help you. YOu finally gave in when you realized you could not persuade them that your previous wording wasn't ideal.&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Micha%C3%ABlle_Jean&amp;diff=372739505&amp;oldid=372711944] (About my seeking of dispute resolution and subsequent (and immediate) acceptance of the compromise)<br /> * A bit of both:<br /> ** &quot;[[User talk:Miesianiacal]] is mistaken at best or at worst lying or incapable of reading.&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Victoria_Day&amp;diff=364232539&amp;oldid=364190872]<br /> * Policing my talk page comments:<br /> ** &quot;Removing prejudice and incorrect commentary&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Victoria_Day&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=364333021]<br /> ** &quot;Inserting your opinion on a talk page to bias the discussion with false information is not a benefit. Don't do it again. I decided not to warn you and merely reverted your attempt to influence editors with your typical misrepresentation. I will be forced to warn you the same way you warned me.&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Miesianiacal&amp;diff=364334889&amp;oldid=364290764]<br /> * General rudeness:<br /> ** &quot;I think 'that country's confederation' is the stupid wording...&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Micha%C3%ABlle_Jean&amp;diff=372703185&amp;oldid=372702336]<br /> ** &quot;Nice hyperbole.&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Miesianiacal&amp;diff=362704286&amp;oldid=362703824]<br /> ** &quot;I wasn't being rude, you are being arrogant though&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Miesianiacal&amp;diff=362704647&amp;oldid=362704286]<br /> ** &quot;Sorry if it offends you to try to make sense.&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Miesianiacal&amp;diff=362752846&amp;oldid=362752457]<br /> ** &quot;Miesianiacal has a Messiah complex&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Victoria_Day&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=364335270]<br /> ** &quot;You really are insipid.&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Miesianiacal&amp;diff=364335627&amp;oldid=364334889]<br /> <br /> Some of the more offensive comments left at my talk page I deleted, but for context and more detail, the following discussions generally illustrate the interactions between Walter Görlitz and myself:<br /> * [[Talk:Victoria Day#For the record]]<br /> * [[Talk:Victoria Day#Long date format]]<br /> * [[Talk:Prime Minister of Canada#Talk:Prime Minister of Canada#Seeking consensus to remove .3Csmall.3E tags around .3Cref.3E]]<br /> * [[Talk:David Lloyd Johnston#Date format]]<br /> * [[Talk:Michaëlle Jean#Confederation of...?]]<br /> * [[User talk:Miesianiacal#Victoria Day x2]]<br /> * [[User talk:Miesianiacal#Counting and WP:3RR]]<br /> * [[User talk:Miesianiacal#GG date formats]]<br /> <br /> It may also be pertinent to check the history of his talk page; he's had some civility warnings in the past (eg. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Walter_G%C3%B6rlitz&amp;diff=371887302&amp;oldid=371827362]), but he deleted them.<br /> <br /> I understand that I am not free of blame for some bad attitude myself, here; in compiling this report, I've come to notice my tendency to be a little too sensitive and beget snippiness with more snippiness. I will try harder to control that. However, it's still my impression that the scales of misbehaviour are tipped towards WG's side (no bias, of course! ;) ). Other input - on WG, myself, or both together - would be appreciated. --&lt;span style=&quot;border-top:1px solid black;font-size:80%&quot;&gt;[[User talk:Miesianiacal|&lt;span style=&quot;background-color:black;color:white&quot;&gt;'''Ħ'''&lt;/span&gt;]] [[User:Miesianiacal|&lt;span style=&quot;color:black&quot;&gt;MIESIANIACAL&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;/span&gt; 15:52, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> : I am not going to argue against this record nor have I read it. [[User: Miesianiacal]]'s ability to record every offence made against him is well recognized. --[[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 17:04, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::Sounds like you two need a divorce. -- [[User:OlEnglish|&lt;font size=&quot;5&quot;&gt;&amp;oelig;&lt;/font&gt;]][[User talk:OlEnglish|&lt;sup&gt;&amp;trade;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 09:13, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :::Agree. And this forum may be the wrong place for that. [[User:Jusdafax|Jusdafax]] 11:07, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::::Not sure what the desired result is: it's not really specified. A possible interaction ban? This is a detailed report, and needs further clarification... [[User:Doc9871|Doc9871]] ([[User talk:Doc9871|talk]]) 11:43, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :::::From my reading of the instructions at the head of this page, I was under the impression that this forum didn't offer much in the way of action; it was more just a place to analyse situations and explore some options. I don't necessarily want to see WG pushed off; he can be productive and sometimes civil. I guess I'd first just like a confirmation that his behaviour has indeed been contrary to Wikipedia's civility guidelines and, if so, have him hear more voices reminding him to keep it respectful and see what results from that. --&lt;span style=&quot;border-top:1px solid black;font-size:80%&quot;&gt;[[User talk:Miesianiacal|&lt;span style=&quot;background-color:black;color:white&quot;&gt;'''Ħ'''&lt;/span&gt;]] [[User:Miesianiacal|&lt;span style=&quot;color:black&quot;&gt;MIESIANIACAL&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;/span&gt; 15:13, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> : Actually I will comment. The &quot;civility warning&quot; was more of a comment made by an editor who took my comment to a third editor, on that third editor's talk page, in the wrong light. The third editor on whose talk page I posted a comment had restored a section to an article with a comment that made it obvious that he missed a discussion on the talk page about removing some content. He was also in an edit war earlier in the day and I was trying to inquire if he was having a bad day. After receiving the &quot;warning&quot; I immediately went back to the third editor and apologized. He then came back and said that he took not offence. And contrary to M's accusation that I deleted &quot;them&quot; (a single warning treated as a plural?) is incorrect as the full discussion is on my talk page and has been there since the issue ended five days ago. I may have received earlier notices or comments and they're in my archives, although I may have removed them after responding. --[[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 22:02, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::So how do you foresee ending this matter? -- [[User:OlEnglish|&lt;font size=&quot;5&quot;&gt;&amp;oelig;&lt;/font&gt;]][[User talk:OlEnglish|&lt;sup&gt;&amp;trade;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 01:48, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == User:Ivyleaguer ==<br /> <br /> Someone needs to have a word with [[User:Ivyleaguer]] as their rudeness and general hostility needs to be checked ASAP. I'm on a Wiki-break at the moment (preventing me from logging in), but I popped in to find this [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3APinkadelica&amp;action=historysubmit&amp;diff=372732445&amp;oldid=372602650 lovely ditty] on my talk page. Basically this started when IvyLeaguer accused me of [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Pinkadelica&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=371304597 spamming their talk page] because I placed a templated warning on the user's talk page for [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tevin_Campbell&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=370586622 adding content] that was not supported by the source given on the [[Tevin Campbell]] article. I was prepared to let that go as the user doesn't appear to edit much and might not understand that talk pages are for editors to communicate with each other, but they re-added the content back to the article a second time with [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tevin_Campbell&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=371306452 two very poor sources] (a blog and Foxytunes which I believe is a music site). Naturally, that didn't go down well and they left yet another message talking about [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Pinkadelica&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=371702565 some kind of nonsense] that I didn't bother reading as I tend to zone out when people who don't know me accuse me of bias and homophobia for removing unsourced content from a BLP. My final message to the user was [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AIvyleaguer&amp;action=historysubmit&amp;diff=371738165&amp;oldid=371307857 rather blunt], but I don't think the responses I've been getting from this sporadic user are warranted in any way (especially since they finally got around to adding a seemingly reliable source and there's no edit war going on). Since the editor doesn't seem to grace us with their presence on a daily basis, I highly doubt their involvement in this thread will happen, but I believe their behavior needs to be dealt with regardless. [[Special:Contributions/70.242.12.110|70.242.12.110]] ([[User talk:70.242.12.110|talk]]) 04:15, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :I've issued a standard warning about personal attacks. Let's see if he joins this discussion. [[User:Netalarm|&lt;font color=&quot;#00AA11&quot;&gt;'''Netalarm'''&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;sup&gt;[[User talk:Netalarm|&lt;font color=&quot;#FF9933&quot;&gt;'''talk'''&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; 17:51, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::Thank you. As I stated previously, I doubt they will participate as they edit sporadically and don't appear to be familiar with Wikipedia process. [[Special:Contributions/70.241.20.100|70.241.20.100]] ([[User talk:70.241.20.100|talk]]) 19:25, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == User:BigK_HeX ==<br /> <br /> {{hat | Closed as not actionable}}<br /> This is a contentious page and the debate tends to get heated. [[User:BigK_HeX]] has made a feel an unwarranted [[wp:pa]] on another editor [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mass_killings_under_Communist_regimes&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=373276976] accusing an editor of being condescending and annoying. I asked him to redact the remarks [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mass_killings_under_Communist_regimes&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=373277411] and he has pointedly refused [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mass_killings_under_Communist_regimes&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=373279441]. I have never actually posted one of these before and am unsure of the correct procedure so am unsure what else to supply [[User:Marknutley|mark nutley]] ([[User talk:Marknutley|talk]]) 16:21, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> : This is the correct procedure. [[User:BigK HeX|BigK HeX]] ([[User talk:BigK HeX|talk]]) 16:33, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> : At this time, my only reply is about the claim that my comment is &quot;unwarranted.&quot; Pretty obviously, I'm not the only editor on that talk page who tire of the snipes of the type that prompted my response. [[User:BigK HeX|BigK HeX]] ([[User talk:BigK HeX|talk]]) 16:35, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::Although I wish editors were held to account for these sorts of comments, &quot;personal attack&quot; on Wikipedia is generally taken to refer to more serious name calling, religious or ethnic slurs, etc. Under current interpretation, there would be no call for this editor to redact these comments. [[User:Yworo|Yworo]] ([[User talk:Yworo|talk]]) 16:37, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :::Frankly the discussion at [[Talk:Mass killings under Communist regimes]] is just getting absurd, with a very clear wedge dividing the arguments into two groups in such a way that the issue is unlikely to be resolved until everyone just gets fed up of arguing about it. This is just the content dispute spilling over into over-sensitive complaints where conduct on both sides of the argument has been less than ideal. BigK's comment was an opinion, not a personal attack. It wasn't exactly constructive or relevant to the discussion, but what exactly do you expect us to do about a user expressing annoyance at the tone of another user's comments? &lt;span id=&quot;sig&quot; style=&quot;background:#FFFFC0&quot;&gt;'''[[User:Giftiger_wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Verdana&quot; color=&quot;#900000&quot;&gt;Giftiger&lt;font color=&quot;#FF0000&quot;&gt;Wunsch&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;]]''' [[User_talk:Giftiger wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Tahoma&quot; color=&quot;#0060A0&quot;&gt;[TALK]&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/span&gt; 17:32, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::::I would expect people to remind him of [[wp:civil]] but if this is the wrong board mark it as resolved. Were should i report people who are insinuating i am a sockpuppet btw? [[User:Marknutley|mark nutley]] ([[User talk:Marknutley|talk]]) 17:38, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :::::Sigh... you're going to need to develop thicker skin if you plan to continue to collaborate, Mark. If someone is accusing you of being a sock of another user, just tell them to file a [[WP:SPI]] if they think they can justify it. Many of your own comments in the discussion at [[Talk:Mass killings under Communist regimes]] have been no more civil than BigK's comment about condescension, so I would ask you to take your own advice rather than complaining about minor comments by other users, especially when they're not even directed at you. &lt;span id=&quot;sig&quot; style=&quot;background:#FFFFC0&quot;&gt;'''[[User:Giftiger_wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Verdana&quot; color=&quot;#900000&quot;&gt;Giftiger&lt;font color=&quot;#FF0000&quot;&gt;Wunsch&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;]]''' [[User_talk:Giftiger wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Tahoma&quot; color=&quot;#0060A0&quot;&gt;[TALK]&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/span&gt; 17:42, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :::::Fair enough, but i do not like being called a sock, i was accused of that when i first got to WP for no reason at all and am a bit touchy about it, thicker skin coming up [[User:Marknutley|mark nutley]] ([[User talk:Marknutley|talk]]) 17:47, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::::::It's happened to me and it's not very pleasant, but in the end they can rant about you being a sock all they like, but if they don't file an SPI they're essentially admitting the accusation's unfounded. &lt;span id=&quot;sig&quot; style=&quot;background:#FFFFC0&quot;&gt;'''[[User:Giftiger_wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Verdana&quot; color=&quot;#900000&quot;&gt;Giftiger&lt;font color=&quot;#FF0000&quot;&gt;Wunsch&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;]]''' [[User_talk:Giftiger wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Tahoma&quot; color=&quot;#0060A0&quot;&gt;[TALK]&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/span&gt; 17:49, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :::::::BigK HeX said OpenFuture was being condescending, which is annoying. At the worst, he said OpenFuture was being condescending. I think we can all agree that real condescension is annoying. It's not a personal attack, maybe a little bit [[WP:CIV|uncivil]], but pretty borderline at that if this is the most you can produce (and, who knows, maybe he was being condescending -- I have no idea what else OpenFuture has said). I would personally prefer to see everybody just take a deep breath and try not to comment on contributors. Move along, shake hands, try to play nice together. &amp;mdash; [[User:E. Ripley|e. ripley]]\&lt;sup&gt;[[User talk:E. Ripley|talk]]&lt;/sup&gt; 18:10, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> *'''Comment''' I recently filed a WQA against OpenFuture, the editor mark nutley says has been attacked.[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts/archive88#User:OpenFuture] Among the numerous comments of his I listed were<br /> ::&quot;And you are also repeating everything both here and on my talk page, which is unnecessary and annoying&quot;.<br /> ::&quot;Your constant attempts of inventing your own Wikipedia policies are getting a bit annoying, to be honest&quot;.<br /> :His response was, &quot;The quotes are all self-explanatory, and in all cases completely correct.... I repeat: There is nothing for me to explain. It is obvious, even out of context, that most quotes above does not represent any abuse.&quot; Since OpenFuture does not consider this type of conversation to be a personal attack or something that should be brought up here, neither should mark nutley. [[User:The Four Deuces|TFD]] ([[User talk:The Four Deuces|talk]]) 18:06, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::Stop dragging me into everything, please. And try to understand the difference between saying &quot;Please stop doing X, it's annoying&quot; and &quot;You are an annoying person&quot;. --[[User:OpenFuture|OpenFuture]] ([[User talk:OpenFuture|talk]]) 21:51, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :::Actually mark nutley dragged you into this by bringing up a comment made about you. My point is that you would not feel the comments were a personal attack because they are the types of comments you have stated you consider to be acceptable. You should ask mark nutley to close this discussion thread. [[User:The Four Deuces|TFD]] ([[User talk:The Four Deuces|talk]]) 22:03, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::::No, he did not drag me into it. My behavior is not the topic here, and even less are your opinions about that behavior relevant. Stop your vendetta, and stop dragging me into everything, and stop trying to make each debate you enter off topic. <br /> ::::Big Ks comment was uncivil, but making a WQA is completely unjustified, a warning on his talk page should have been enough. But it's up to Mark if he wants to close the WQA, not me. I have nothing to do with this besides being the target of BigK's mild uncivility. --[[User:OpenFuture|OpenFuture]] ([[User talk:OpenFuture|talk]]) 19:49, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> {{hab}}<br /> == Eva Grossjean ==<br /> <br /> {{user|Eva Grossjean}} Continued incivility past final warning. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;action=history Revision history of Catalonia] for most of the belittling edit summaries, although some anti-IP biases (and the worst of the insults) are on the user's talk page. [[Special:Contributions/69.181.249.92|69.181.249.92]] ([[User talk:69.181.249.92|talk]]) 21:06, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :I understand that doing the &lt;nowiki&gt;{{user|Username template thingy}}&lt;/nowiki&gt; ''in the thread title'' messes with some people's browsers, so I fixed it for you. {{unsigned|Ian.thomson}}<br /> <br /> :I think the &quot;final warning&quot; was a bit premature, but this new editor does need to be stopped from being abusive towards other editors. [[User:Boing! said Zebedee|Boing! said Zebedee]] ([[User talk:Boing! said Zebedee|talk]]) 21:36, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::I'm leaving a handwritten note basically explaining that civility, not English, is a standard of &quot;fitness&quot; around here. [[User:Ian.thomson|Ian.thomson]] ([[User talk:Ian.thomson|talk]]) 21:40, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :::Looks perfect, thanks -- [[User:Boing! said Zebedee|Boing! said Zebedee]] ([[User talk:Boing! said Zebedee|talk]]) 22:07, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :I want to report that Eva Grossjean has returned to act inappropriately in the discussion page of Catalonia, as can be seen in the link ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Catalonia#Catalonia_is_not_a_nation_.28at_least_legally.29_but_a_historical_nationality.]), maintaining an attitude arrogant and condescending and insulting me several times. [[User:Arkarull|Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]]) 00:16, 15 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::I've placed a uw-npa after placing an attempt to uw-delete and uw-cite (trying to go easy, I could have done the uw-delete and the uw-cite separately). It's looking like an SPA, and while I don't necessarily think that an editor being narrowly focused on a single subject is a bad thing, if she continues to ignore basic guidelines like WP:CIVIL and WP:CITE (but especially WP:CIVIL), I'll take this over to [[WP:ANI|ANI]]. [[User:Ian.thomson|Ian.thomson]] ([[User talk:Ian.thomson|talk]]) 23:44, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Thaks Ian for your time. Even though Eva did not retract of her offenses and persists in insulting. But I will not go more into her game, perhaps the &quot;mental laziness&quot; that causes me to be Spanish prevents me of defend my honor. Who knows. In any case I do not know what a person as she can contribute to Wikipedia. --[[User:Arkarull|Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]]) 08:49, 15 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == User:Whisky drinker ==<br /> <br /> {{resolved|A clear accident, apology has been made by HJ on his talk page, and Xeno added a note to the page history to make it clear the warning was an error. --'''[[User:Taelus|&lt;font color=&quot;#007FAA&quot;&gt;Taelus&lt;/font&gt;]]''' ([[User talk:Taelus|&lt;font color=&quot;#AA22CC&quot;&gt;'''Talk'''&lt;/font&gt;]]) 21:11, 14 July 2010 (UTC)}}<br /> <br /> [[User:Whisky drinker]] placed a a &quot;Level 3 warning re. vandalism&quot; on [[User talk:Fages]], which is my own talk page. He was warning me to not edit my own talk page. He also reverted and then restored the &quot;smiley&quot; that I add to my own talk page. See Diff [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AFages&amp;action=historysubmit&amp;diff=373470651&amp;oldid=373470593]. I want to have the edit summary warning removed from my edit history. I am not able to contact [[User:Whisky drinker]] because his talk page is protected and I am not able to leave messages there. [[User:Fages|Fages]] ([[User talk:Fages|talk]]) 17:30, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :Whiskey Drinker I believe is an alternative account for [[User:HJ Mitchell]]. I've let him know this is here.--[[User:Cube lurker|Cube lurker]] ([[User talk:Cube lurker|talk]]) 17:50, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::As a cursory examination of your talk page's history will show you, I reverted my own edit '''''9 seconds''''' after making it. Also, if you'd visited either Whisky drinker's talk or userpages, you would have noticed the big, bold, red notice asking you to post to my talk page or note a bad revert on the relevant page. So far you've been to RFUP and WQA but not my talk page. What are you trying to achieve? [[User:HJ Mitchell|&lt;font color=&quot;Teal&quot; face=&quot;Tahoma&quot;&gt;'''HJ&amp;nbsp;Mitchell'''&lt;/font&gt;]] &amp;#124; [[User talk:HJ Mitchell|&lt;font color=&quot;Navy&quot; face= &quot;Times New Roman&quot;&gt;Penny for your thoughts? &lt;/font&gt;]] 17:56, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :::Wow, this is the second day he's been here. Maybe a little more [[WP:AGF]] and a little less [[WP:BITE]].--[[User:Cube lurker|Cube lurker]] ([[User talk:Cube lurker|talk]]) 18:00, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :::An apology with an edit summary clarifying the warning was a mistake would have been more appropriate than a simple revert HJ, after all a new user is likely to be bewildered with a warning message regardless of whether it goes away or not, especially as the scary &quot;warning&quot; message in the edit summary looks rather permanant to them when they view their page history. Not a huge issue mind, but a little apology and a friendly follow-up message to help the user out could go a long way. (For other observers, do note that the reason this ended up at WQA was due to a fully protected talk page that HJ was not aware of, so confusion all around it seems.) --'''[[User:Taelus|&lt;font color=&quot;#007FAA&quot;&gt;Taelus&lt;/font&gt;]]''' ([[User talk:Taelus|&lt;font color=&quot;#AA22CC&quot;&gt;'''Talk'''&lt;/font&gt;]]) 20:03, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::::Marked as resolved per description, a mistake which has been corrected, and an apology given. :) --'''[[User:Taelus|&lt;font color=&quot;#007FAA&quot;&gt;Taelus&lt;/font&gt;]]''' ([[User talk:Taelus|&lt;font color=&quot;#AA22CC&quot;&gt;'''Talk'''&lt;/font&gt;]]) 21:11, 14 July 2010 (UTC)</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Catalonia&diff=373522519 2010-07-14T22:28:30Z

<p>Arkarull: /* Catalonia is not a nation (at least legally) but a historical nationality. */</p> <hr /> <div>{{Skip to talk}}<br /> {{Talk header|search=yes}}<br /> {{Off topic warning}}<br /> {{Controversial3}}<br /> {{WikiProject Spain|class=c|importance=top}}<br /> {{WikiProject Catalan-speaker|class=c|importance=top}}<br /> {{OnThisDay|date1=2004-09-11|oldid1=9955831}}<br /> {{auto archiving notice|bot=MiszaBot|age=30|dounreplied=yes}}<br /> {{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn<br /> |target=Talk:Catalonia/Archive index<br /> |mask=Talk:Catalonia/Archive &lt;#&gt;<br /> |leading_zeros=0<br /> |indexhere=yes}}<br /> {{User:MiszaBot/config<br /> |archiveheader = {{aan}}<br /> |maxarchivesize = 200K<br /> |counter = 5<br /> |minthreadsleft = 10<br /> |minthreadstoarchive = 1<br /> |algo = old(30d)<br /> |archive = Talk:Catalonia/Archive %(counter)d<br /> }}<br /> <br /> == Catalonia definition must me corrected ==<br /> <br /> We must differentiate between geographic and politics definition.<br /> Catalonia is a geographical area comprising actual Catalan Community in Spain and Cerdanya which actually is the french department of Pyrinèes Oriental. If there is any reference to Catalonia as a nation, it must cover all Catalonia and not merely the Catalan Community of Spain.<br /> Both populations consider theirselves Catalans sharing the same Catalan language, (even it is not considered an official language in France because political assumptions) whith respect for each political nationality, french or spanish. <br /> <br /> The definition must be considered as follows:<br /> <br /> ''Catalonia Community covers an area of 32,114 km² and has an official population of 7,210,508[1]. It borders Cerdanya in France and Andorra to the north, Aragon to the west, the Valencian Community to the south, and the Mediterranean Sea to the east (580 km coastline). Official languages are Catalan, Spanish and Aranese.''<br /> <br /> I understand that the separatist ideas of some french and spanish nationalism against the European Union cultural heritage must be erradicated if we want the wikipedia project to progress.<br /> <br /> :I'm sorry but I must disagree with you. There is another concept for the whole catalan-speaking territories and it is [[Catalan Countries]].<br /> :Catalonia's definition is being discussed in the section above (for a long time).--[[User:Civit cardona|Civit cardona]] ([[User talk:Civit cardona|talk]]) 14:04, 15 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> I struggle to believe that Perpignan in France should only be counted as &quot;Catalan speaking&quot;. They fly the Catalan flag, it's historically and cultural strongly Catalan, and the Rugby League team (which should also be mentioned and linked in the article) is called Catalan Dragons. In Catalan the area is called Northern Catalonia. <br /> <br /> I'm sure this is a controversial issue whatever is included in the article, but ignoring Northern Catalonia in the article completely strikes me as a whitewash and not a neutral POV. [[User:Davini994|Davini994]] ([[User talk:Davini994|talk]]) 10:22, 3 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :This article is hijacked by some editors near to spanish unionist positions. I do agree with you that not speaking about the Catalan nation and what and where is North Catalonia is simply a failure of reflecting the Catalan reality. If the article is only speaking about the autonomous community then it should be called 'Autonomous Community of Catalonia'[[Special:Contributions/95.61.18.160|95.61.18.160]] ([[User talk:95.61.18.160|talk]]) 19:09, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Flag of Catalonia ==<br /> <br /> I think that there are some problems with that sentence: &quot;The flag of Catalonia or ''[[Senyera]]'' (''flag'' in [[Catalan language|Catalan]]), is a [[vexillological symbol]] based on the [[coat of arms]] of the [[Crown of Aragon]], which consists of four red stripes on a golden background. It is an official symbol since the Statute of Catalonia of 1932.&quot; The flag was an heraldic emblem of Counts of Barcelona before being in the Crown of Aragon.--[[User:Vilarrubla|Vilar]] 22:48, 19 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Since both claims are correct, next time, instead than removing a correct fact from an article (i.e: &quot;based on the [[coat of arms]] of the [[Crown of Aragon]]&quot;), you should, if willing to add your POV, limit yourself to add to that sentence a &quot;and of the counts of barcelona&quot; instead than erasing the content (which is also fully referenced). --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 01:18, 20 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> ::I have not erased anything and that was not fully referenced. The reference #46 says: &quot;The flag of Catalonia, which is the traditional flag with four red stripes on a yellow background, shall be present on public buildings and during official acts held in Catalonia.&quot; and I don't see anything about Crown of Aragon or Counts of Barcelona in that reference. --[[User:Vilarrubla|Vilar]] 10:45, 20 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == The map ==<br /> <br /> Carles, noticing your last [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=302485241&amp;oldid=302474758 edit], I just want to point you that each and every other article about CCAA has the vectorial map (just take a look yourself). If we want to keep some equality and sense around wikipedia, the correct thing is to leave the other one. there is no real reasons for this article to be the exemption. My thoughts only. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 22:40, 16 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Sorry, Maurice, I beg to disagree. At least the maps for the Valencian Community and the Balearic Islands have also been changed today (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Valencian_Community&amp;diff=302475380&amp;oldid=302426446] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Balearic_Islands&amp;diff=302472767&amp;oldid=302008420]) to this kind of Spain-centered map. So the situation is not like you seem to describe: the map in Catalonia article being a unique strange singularity to be corrected with respect to a long well-established tradition in all the remaining communities. No. The fact is that just now some people propose this new solution. We can discuss it, of course. My initial point is that I prefer the maps those communities have had for a long time because they are more globally-minded and show their position not only inside Spain, but also in a European context. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 23:09, 16 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::Sadly, like so many other times, it is not a point of what we do prefer, but to continue the path followed by the majority of the other articles. Let's not forget that this article is part of an encyclopedia, and as such, all related articles must follow the same guidelines. If you take a look at all the articles about CCAA. Like it or not, the vectorial map seems to be the prefered by all the editors involved in the majority of all those articles. If you take a look at the portuguese districts([[Braga (district)]], [[Bragança (district)]], [[Faro (district)]], [[Lisboa (district)]]...), the french regions ([[Alsace]], [[Champagne-Ardenne]], [Bourgogne]], [[Nord-Pas-de-Calais]], [[Pays de la Loire]], [[Rhône-Alpes]]...) or the italian italian regions ([[Abruzzo]], [[Calabria]], [[Lazio]], [[Marche]], [[Sardinia]], [[Tuscany]]...), you will notice that they all do share the same maps and that are always &quot;country-centered&quot; (if I may say so). Having different types of maps depending on the region selected is in my opinion undesirable.<br /> <br /> ::That said, I believe that the correct thing is to implement the map used by the majority of the articles CCAA-related. In addition, let's not forget that this is this the english wikipedia, and as such, it is like the &quot;international version&quot; of it. If some user from Indonesia wants to learn about a CCAA (let's say Catalonia in this particular case) you can bet for sure he might be much more interested to understand where it is placed in relation to the rest of the country than in relation to Europe.<br /> <br /> ::I think that those are the 2 most important reasons to keep the vectorial map. If someday, Europe really becomes something close enough to a united country, then your position of an europen-minded map should be the one to follow... But only if that is the position for all the articles in wikipedia related to europen regions... Cheers. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 17:45, 17 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::Thanks for your explanation, Maurice, and sorry for my late reply (I am back from holidays just now). I agree with you that homogeneity is good in general, but I'm still not sure whether it constitutes a sufficient reason for the change you propose. I haven't seen any wiki policy enforcing this uniformity, although I agree with you that it is desirable. But, actually, there would be a way to make both of us happy, i.e. to preserve both good properties at once (global-minded maps and homogeneity): uploading maps like those we had during the last years for the Catalan-speaking communities also for the remaining Spanish autonomous communities, right? This is my proposal. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 08:51, 19 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::::I thought you were on vacations... Hope you enjoyed them! I don't mind your proposal but, do you know how to create maps? Because I don't. If nobody uploads those maps for the rest of the CCAA, we get back to start. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 09:49, 19 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::Yes, I've enjoyed them a lot, thanks! :) Good to see that you are open to a proposal that would solve both of our concern at once. As regards to the maps, this seems to completely feasible. I am checking that those files already exist: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Andaluc%C3%ADa.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Extremadura.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Castilla-La_Mancha.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Castilla_y_Le%C3%B3n.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_la_Comunidad_de_Madrid.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Galicia.png], etc. (you see the pattern). So homogeneity is not really a problem. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 10:34, 20 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Hi there Carles. Long time no see. <br /> <br /> I wanted to make you reconsider your position about keeping the european centered maps. For almost one year(?), you have been defending those maps against (quite a lot now) changes by multiple editors to the one used in the rest of CCAA related articles. We already discussed this matter long time ago (uniformity in wikipedia articles, the country being more important than the continent...).<br /> <br /> You know I don't agree with your position, but for the sake of both of us I left your option. But now, you should admit that your opinion is probably a minority.<br /> <br /> Tell me what you think. Cheers. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 10:05, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi Maurice! Nice to meet you here again. Hope you're doing fine.<br /> :I don't completely agree with your analysis of the situation. First, those maps are not my invention. They were already in stable versions of the entries when I joined the project, more than two years ago. Second, after a quick check on the history of the entry on [[Catalonia]], I've counted only four users changing the map to the Spanish-centered one since we discussed the issue. And none of them, unlike you, has bothered to write a single line on the talk page to state their points for the change. On the other hand, there has been one user who has proposed a [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mapa_de_localitzaci%C3%B3_a_les_comarques_catalanes.svg Catalan-centered map] which, coherently with my globally-minded approach, I don't like and I don't support. Therefore, I don't think that &quot;lonely Carles fighting against a majority of users who argue for a Spain-centered map&quot; is a faithful account of the situation, because they are few, they hardly argue, and there have even been proposals in a different direction. In this discussion, we made our positions quite clear. Let me remind my points:<br /> :* The main thing here is to offer an accurate map (faithful to both geographical and political reality) and as informative as possible to help readers from all over the world to locate these regions.<br /> :* In particular, the maps should clearly show the administrative borders of the autonomous communities, their position inside Spain (for they belong to this sovereign state, and nowadays sovereign states are the key element in geopolitical divisions), and their position in a wider context to give the maximum information to non-European readers. All of this can be achieved with the pictures I've been defending.<br /> :* Homogeneity with entries about other regions is certainly a good value to pursue and, as I already showed, it does not contradict any point above, because we already have in Commons maps of this kind (showing both Spanish and European context) for all the remaining Spanish regions.<br /> :--[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera#top|talk]]) 11:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Carles, all the autonomies of Spain have the same map. I understand that you are independentist but this it is not motive for including a map where you cannot see the whole country. I am sorry, but it isn't logical to include a map different to the rest. [[User:Diplomatiko|Diplomatiko]] ([[User talk:Diplomatiko|talk]]) 14:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi, Diplomatiko. Many thanks for joining the discussion. I would like to kindly ask you a couple of things. First, it would help the discussion a lot, if you would read carefully what has been said so far. In particular, you'll find a specific proposal dealing with the uniformity problem you are concerned with. Second, I would appreciate it very much if you would abstain from making assumptions on other users personal views. It doesn't really help the discussion (after all, personal opinions of the editors do not matter much when we are trying to produce a neutral text), and sometimes (this is the case now) you can be misled to wrong conclusions: I am not an independentist (not even a nationalist), as it can be easily seen in the userboxes in my webpage. Anyway, we can forget about this, because talk pages are not meant to discuss about any user, but about the article in question and to decide how to collectively improve it. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 14:50, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :I see you are taking your time to think about it. Fair enough. In the meantime, I shall restore the previous consensual map. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 10:19, 25 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> I'm restoring the regular map (the one which all the other articles use). There's no reason to use another map: NUTS maps don't offer an enough clear sight of a country subdivision location. Furthermore, this (and sometimes the Valencian Community one, for obvious reasons...) is the only country subdivision article in the entire Wikipedia where they're used. [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 21:01, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi Icallbs. Thanks for your comments. But, have you bothered to read the discussion above where I showed that your concerns on homogeneity in Spanish regions entries are compatible with my concerns for globality for non-Spanish readers? Please take a look at it. On the other hand, let me remind that prior to changing a disputed content, you should reach consensus, not the other way around as you have done know (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus#Consensus-building]). Cheers, --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:51, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Maybe you misunderstood &quot;NUTS&quot;. [[NUTS of Spain|These]] are the Spanish NUTS regions, in which the map you use is based. <br /> <br /> :: I've read that discussion, and I must say those maps aren't suitable at all in this kind of articles. They just aren't, just have a look at France's subdivisions articles, or Italy's, or Portugal's, or Poland's. Sadly, I think those &quot;concerns&quot; aren't really &quot;for globality&quot;. Exaxtly because non-Spanish users are the ones who will be reading this, they'll the ones the maps should be adressed to. I encourage you to read the consesus-building article you pointed before for the further seeking of a common point. Other users like MauritiusXIII can help us improving these aspects too. In the meantime, probably the regular map is the better option because of the homogeneity. Also, I'd like you to consider Dr01drpny's option, it's the same map as the rest of Spain's regions and it has the globality element.<br /> <br /> :: [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 18:45, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi. I combined both maps to try to fulfill both concerns regarding homogeneity and wider region location inside Europe. You can add it to the article if you agree with it: [[:File:Localització de Catalunya.png]]. Cheers. --[[User:Dr01drpny|Dr01drpny]] ([[User talk:Dr01drpny|talk]]) 23:45, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi there. Thank you very much, Dr01drpny, for your input. That moves towards the good direction to resolve the dispute, indeed. As for Icallbs, first let me say I'm sorry for having misunderstood the &quot;NUTS&quot; thing; I didn't know that concept. Thank you for pointing it out. However, you might want to apologize as well for assuming bad faith in me when you write &quot;I think those concerns aren't really for globality&quot;. I am proud to claim that all my contributions to Wikipedia (both in articles and in talk pages) are openly honest and faithful to my points of view; it would certainly be stupid to act otherwise when I am editing under my real name. So, this frank globality concern is starting to be addressed by Dr01drpny in his proposal, and I have tentatively tried how it looks in the article. I would like to ask him, since he looks very deft in map creation, to propose some other solutions which could make the European map bigger (now it is too hard to see). An easy solution is to increase the box on the right-bottom corner (there is some space on the sea and Africa that could be covered without problems). A better one would be to create something analogous to the maps used in [[Scotland]], [[Wales]] or [[England]], where the European map is the main one while the whole state (the UK in this case) is also shown in the box, which seems to be something of the highest importance to some users. After seeing (some of) these possibilities we could decide which is the nicest and most suitable for these articles. Needless to say, to satisfy the urge for homogeneity in Spanish autonomous communities articles, the new kind of map will have to be produced for each of them. Looking forward to hearing from all of you, --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:31, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Hi there. I agree with the idea of having a wider (Europe / World) localization map, especially for people from other countries. Still, there are some users who want homogeneity with the maps of all the other regions of Spain. Creating a new version of all these maps is a notable effort, and it would require a deeper consensus (currently the map is being changed almost every day). Maybe something to talk about in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Spain | WikiProject Spain]]. In the meanwhile I uploaded an updated version of the file with a bigger Europe map as Cnoguera asked. You can see the preview [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 | here]. --[[User:Dr01drpny|Dr01drpny]] ([[User talk:Dr01drpny|talk]]) 23:34, 6 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi, thanks again for you valuable help. That one is better indeed, but I still think that something like the UK maps would be even better (both having a clear depiction of the whole state administrative structure, as required by Maurice and Icallbs, and nice big global maps for a globally-minded English encyclopedia as seen e.g. in the UK entries). I suggest to explore that possibility before taking any decision. I understand the non-trivial effort the whole thing requires (and I truly thank you for your excellent technical help), but there certainly are strong concerns about homogeneity by several users, as you can see in the discussion above. As far as I am concerned, as a member of the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Catalan-speaking_Countries]], at least I'll work to have a uniform solution for the three articles under its scope. Sadly enough, while we are fruitfully discussing the issue here, some users like [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/79.153.124.250 this anonymous IP] keep trying to impose their point of view without bothering to contribute to the consensus building. I've already warned him about it. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:38, 7 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :However, if it is too difficult to produce these alternative maps, I suggest to go for the easiest solution and stick to the good old NUTS maps. Moreover there seems to be [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Basque_Country_%28autonomous_community%29#Edit_war_around_locator_map agreement on that elsewhere].--[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 15:27, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: That example doesn't suits our particular case... The country-centered map in that example just sucks! Portugal and France don't even appear. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 19:04, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Oh, yes. You're right, now I see it. I assumed, reasonably, that this discussion in [[Talk:Basque Country (autonomous community)]] was analogous to ours because there actually was an identical edit war proposing the same kind of map. But now I see that the discussion is strangely ignoring that one and proposing an ugly Spain-centered map where the country looks like an island... --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 19:46, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Like an island? Have you seen the German, French, Italian, Portuguese, or basically any other country subdivision article other than the British ones to use world maps for locating a region? It's stupid! Furthermore, the current map shows Portugal, the French border and even North Africa, which is much more than many (probably more than any other but the UK's constituent COUNTRIES [see what I did there?] articles). In the discussion you pointed at, there were only two votes... That's not a &quot;long-standing consensus&quot; nor it shows a reasonable solution. I'm sorry if I've been a bit rough in this comment, but these attempts to vandalize Wikipedia (specially the English one, cause it's the one millions of people from all countries, even non-English, read), trying to mislead them make me really upset. [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 20:34, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Yes, Icallbs, now you look upset indeed. Now you start referring to the proposals you don't like as &quot;stupid&quot; and to their defense as &quot;attempts to vandalize Wikipedia&quot; and &quot;trying to mislead&quot;... You know? it's a bad sign when one needs to use derogative terms to undermine the opponent's position in the discussion. But if you count to ten, take a deep breath, sit back and then read carefully the stuff above again, you'll realize what's written isn't that stupid after all. First, you'll see that the Spain-centered map where the country looks like an island I was referring to is, in fact, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_Comunidad_Vasca.png this one], and the island metaphor was already used in [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Basque_Country_(autonomous_community)#Edit_war_around_locator_map that discussion]. Second, you'll see I only attracted your attention to the Basque Country thing becauses it does resemble the discussion we currently having here, so it might be relevant. Third, you'll see I never described as a &quot;long-standing consensus&quot; what they have there, but I only said that &quot;there SEEMS to be an agreement&quot; there (and it really looks like that, when nobody has expressed any opinion against the NUTS map in that discussion thread; interestingly not even yourself after [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Basque_Country_(autonomous_community)&amp;diff=348810628&amp;oldid=348794880 you added the map you want]).<br /> :The discussion here is certainly far from being over. We are still waiting for new options from Dr01drpny or any other user able to produce them. So I wasn't restoring the NUTS maps (and BTW those are the really long-standing ones as a matter of fact in the Valencian Community, Balearic Islands and Catalonia entries) because of an alleged achievement of a new consensus. I was doing it because otherwise, when the map you like is there, some people seem to completely forget about the discussion and disappear for days. Interestingly enough, they suddenly come back when I restore the previous solution (sometimes yourself, sometimes some mysterious IPs which give little to none explanation for their edits). And, symmetrically, I could as well object that your putting back there the state-centered map is not fair before a decision is reached. But I won't, because my intention is already fulfilled by having people interested again in the discussion, which is the main issue here. Let us proceed then. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 09:51, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> * Please, don't mess this discussion here with the rest of the Autonomous Communities'. IF and only IF there is a general Wikipedia guideline regarding this issue, you can discuss other articles. Otherwise, keep it as a per article discussion and don't change other articles in which you are NOT involved, as the BAC one. We had our own discussion there and reached our own consensus. BTW, I don't get the &quot;goodness&quot; of that island-like map. It's geographical projection is not adequate for representing Spain, nor it does represent accurate detailed maps for each AC, as the green ones do. And again, these maps were replaced recently by anonymous users, probably to match them with the maps used in the Spanish Wiki, that may be are not the most accurate ones, you know. [[User:Deibid|David]] ([[User talk:Deibid|talk]]) 14:49, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: It is that &quot;IF&quot; precisely which I've been looking for weeks! Can't find anything... but I'm sure there is a guideline for these cases. If we find a guideline, we got the solution... I've tried quite a few wikiprojects but nothing... Any ideas, anyone? --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 19:47, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::As an outside observer who has occasionally reverted the wilder changes here ... I get confused exactly which map is which now, but FWIW I think the map should be clear in showing both where Catalonia is within Spain, and also where it is in the context of the wider European area. I'm not sure [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;oldid=352701357 this] version - the current one as I write - does that. It's too close-up, in the main part. I personally prefer the one [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 here], which I think was put together more recently. If you look for example at ones in respect of the UK, eg for [[Wales]] or [[Scotland]], they're even more &quot;global&quot; in perspective. In addition, there should ultimately be consistency across all the Spanish region/nation articles. &lt;small&gt;'''[[User:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;navy&quot;&gt;N-HH&lt;/font&gt;]]''' '''[[User talk:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]/[[Special:Contributions/N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;edits&lt;/font&gt;]]'''&lt;/small&gt; 14:56, 29 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 this version] is clearly the most desirable one. It has what all of us find important on a map. But we do lack of all the other maps for the rest of the Autonomous Communities. If someone knows how to add the small european map on the rest of them (and willing to), the problem is solved. I already tried to some days ago, but to manipulate svg's is beyond my comprehension... ;) --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 07:40, 30 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Catalan vs. Catalonian ==<br /> <br /> Most of the article uses the word &quot;Catalan&quot; as an English demonym adjective in almost all cases. The article even states in the infobox itself that the English demonym is &quot;Catalan&quot;. However, the section on popular culture uses the demonym &quot;Catalonian&quot;. Which is correct, if any? Either the references to &quot;Catalonian&quot; need to be changed to &quot;Catalan&quot; or, alternatively, &quot;Catalonian&quot; should be recognised as a possible demonym. [[User:Madeinsane|Madeinsane]] ([[User talk:Madeinsane|talk]]) 18:57, 13 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> You're right. 'Catalonian' is incorrect, or at least not as correct as 'Catalan'. I've removed the former from the article. That said, the entire section on popular culture needs clearing up. It is very badly written and might also be split to a new page. Any thoughts? --[[User:Tomclarke|Tomclarke]] ([[User talk:Tomclarke|talk]]) 15:15, 20 October 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Goth-Alania &gt; Catalonia ==<br /> <br /> &quot;...the name of the Spanish province Catalonia, which is but a slight deformation of Goth-Alania, &quot;province of the Goths and Alans&quot;...&quot; (from ''Alans'', Encyclopaedia Iranica) http://www.iranica.com/newsite/index.isc?Article=http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/unicode/v1f8/v1f8a013.html [[User:Böri|Böri]] ([[User talk:Böri|talk]]) 14:12, 25 December 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> --This is not true at all, just a fantasy theory, the name Catalonia probably comes from Gothalunda/Gothland &gt; Catalunya or from Castelans(people who lives in castles)&gt; Castelunya &gt; Catalunya <br /> --[[Special:Contributions/79.159.194.238|79.159.194.238]] ([[User talk:79.159.194.238|talk]]) 17:11, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == What ''is'' a nation, anyway? ==<br /> <br /> If you seek the answer to this question in ordinary English dictionaries, you’ll find entries like this:<br /> <br /> :a large aggregate of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular country or territory ''(Oxford New American Dictionary)''<br /> or<br /> :... '''1''' a body of people associated with a particular territory, that is sufficiently conscious of its unity to seek or to possess a government peculiarly its own ''(Webster’s Encyclopedic Dictionary)''<br /> <br /> or<br /> <br /> :... '''2''' a community of persons not constituting a state but bound by common descent, language, history, etc. ''(Collins English Dictionary)''<br /> <br /> So are Wikipedia editors entitled to describe Catalonia as a nation? On the basis of the foregoing, clearly they are. And what about the Spanish Constitutional Court? Well, neither they nor any other institution or legislature have any business to dictate English usage. Many editors (particularly some who are not native English speakers) have failed to take account of this fact. When the term “nation” is used in the context of Catalonia’s legal status, we need to make it quite clear in what sense it’s being used.<br /> <br /> Let me hasten to add that the foregoing mustn’t be taken to imply that I’m supporting a Catalanist position here: that would be to fall into exactly the sort of confusion between linguistic usage and legal definition that I'm criticizing.<br /> <br /> [[User:AdeMiami|AdeMiami]] ([[User talk:AdeMiami|talk]]) 15:51, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Recent edit warring ==<br /> <br /> Look, this back and forth edit warring isn't really helping anything. You guys need to discuss it here. As an outsider with no stake in this, could I clarify a few points and ask people to follow them up below? There seem to be three main issues here -<br /> <br /> ===Nation/region/nationality etc in the lead, post court case===<br /> <br /> Per the above section, I don't think anyone can argue against the idea Catalonia is a &quot;nation&quot; in the broadest sense of the word - in the same way that is is also a &quot;region&quot;, and &quot;area&quot; or whatever, as well as more formally an &quot;Autonomous Community&quot;. The Spanish Constitutional Court ruling would also seem - according to the [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/spain/7861118/Catalonia-can-call-itself-a-nation-rules-Spains-top-court.html Telegraph piece] being cited - to have now more formally confirmed/accepted the use of the term &quot;nation&quot; in the latest Statute of Autonomy. However, it seems that they are saying that precisely because it is simply a vague cultural term that does not have a &quot;legal value&quot; or constitutional implications - ie it's accurate, but not that significant. The issue at stake is what to highlight and prioritise in the lead, and I'm not sure that simply sourcing to the Telegraph piece helps. That article also describes Catalonia as a &quot;region&quot;, and it's not clear on what basis one term is being preferred here over any other. It seems to me that using more formally defined terminology, where the terms wiki-link to pages about terms as they are used in a Spanish context - ie as in [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;oldid=371840349 this version] - would be better.<br /> <br /> :I don't think this formula would work, because the list of Spain's &quot;constituent historical nationalities&quot; has never been laid out and, in any event, it would open a can of worms. One million pounds for those who try (and succeed on) it: would Navarre be part of the Basque nation? Is there a constituent nationality called Castile? If that's so, would Andalusia be part of it (it was part of Castile's Crown, after all..)? Etc, etc.<br /> <br /> :Nor can we accept, as some editor has pretended, that all of Spain's autonomous regions are nationalities. Madrid is an autonomous region, but neither a nation nor a nationality. The same goes for, let's say, Extremadura, Cantabria or Murcia. I'm sorry for being so blunt on the matter, but some of Spain's autonomous regions are nations whereas others are just that: regions. And we all know who's who on this.<br /> <br /> :The points are: <br /> <br /> ::(a) Catalonia's Autonomy Charter describes it as a nation (whether this is legally binding is of no importance: this is Wikipedia, not a constitutionalists' forum). This term ('nation') was sanctioned by (a) Catalonia's Parliament, (b) Spain's Parliament and (c) Catalonia's people in a referendum.<br /> <br /> ::(b) Spain's Constitutional Court has sanctioned its use (again: whether this is legally binding is of no importance: this is Wikipedia, not a constitutionalists' forum). <br /> <br /> ::(c) Countless English-language sources (and this is ''English'' Wikipedia, by the way) describe Catalonia as a nation. Those sources (for instance, The Daily Telegraph) can't be accused of any sort of nationalist leaning. Quite the contrary, as the Irish experience shows to us.<br /> <br /> [[User:Andreas Balart|Andreas Balart]] ([[User talk:Andreas Balart|talk]]) 08:27, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Order of languages===<br /> <br /> Is there a formal, agreed view in the real world of which of Catalan and Spanish is the &quot;main&quot; language, eg by virtue of official recognition as such within Catalonia and/or Spain as a whole, or are there official figures that reveal one language is more commonly spoken as a first language in Catalonia than the other? If so, the order should just follow that. If not, or there's no clear answer on those criteria, how about going by alphabetical order, ie Catalan first (although it would be slightly odd to apply this across all languages and put Aranese right at the top)?<br /> <br /> ===Parliament===<br /> <br /> It seems kind of obvious to me that the Parliament field in the infobox should refer to the Catalan parliament and link to that page, not to the national Spanish parliament. See [[Scotland]] for example.<br /> <br /> Anyway, those are my thoughts, if they help. There's plenty else that needs improving with the rest of the article, and genuine vandalism seems to slip by unnoticed while all this gets edit warred over. --&lt;small&gt;'''[[User:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;navy&quot;&gt;N-HH&lt;/font&gt;]]''' '''[[User talk:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]/[[Special:Contributions/N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;edits&lt;/font&gt;]]'''&lt;/small&gt; 15:23, 5 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Dear '''N-HH''',<br /> <br /> :If anything this point demostrates the sort of people who've hijacked and taken over this article over the last months and years, masquerading their byass as ''consensus'': they were actually ''so'' byassed that they '''deleted any reference''' to Catalonia's Parliament on Catalonia's infobox. It beggars belief.<br /> <br /> :We can put it down to a whole set of prejudices. Otherwise, it is rather difficult to understand this behaviour.<br /> <br /> :For too many months, I've been watching over it. But enough is enough. <br /> <br /> :[[User:Andreas Balart|Andreas Balart]] ([[User talk:Andreas Balart|talk]]) 08:32, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Automate archiving? ==<br /> <br /> Does anyone object to me setting up automatic archiving for this page using MiszaBot? Unless otherwise agreed, I would set it to archive threads that have been inactive for 30 days and keep ten threads.--[[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] ([[User talk:Oneiros|talk]]) 20:43, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :{{done}}--[[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] ([[User talk:Oneiros|talk]]) 13:47, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Spain high court rules against &quot;nation&quot; term ==<br /> <br /> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100710/ap_on_re_eu/eu_spain_catalan_charter &lt;span style=&quot;font-size: smaller;&quot; class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/75.85.14.106|75.85.14.106]] ([[User talk:75.85.14.106|talk]]) 02:14, 11 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;!-- Template:UnsignedIP --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;<br /> <br /> :No credit shoud be paid to anonymous vandalist comments<br /> :[[User:Eva Grossjean|Eva Grossjean]] ([[User talk:Eva Grossjean|talk]]) 14:11, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> ::Wikipedia is about speaking from the facts, not only from part of the political POV or from the legal POV (legal but not moral as the decisions of Spanish Constitutional Court are more than discussed). Anyone at Catalonia knows a significant part of the people living there feels that part of Spain as a nation with right of self-governing and any source considered trustable should reflect that. Any editor not trusting this can search about the Catalan display on this 11th July and will see that spanish high court is simply applying a centralist POV. BR anonymous. [[Special:Contributions/95.61.18.160|95.61.18.160]] ([[User talk:95.61.18.160|talk]]) 19:00, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Catalonia is not a nation (at least legally) but a historical nationality. ==<br /> <br /> Spain's Constitutional Court accepts the definition as nation for Catalonia but has no legal value. For legal purposes is still considered a historical nationality and in any case should not be included within the framework of political status. Catalonia is only an autonomous region of Spain. &lt;small&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Arkarull|Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Arkarull|contribs]]) 13:54, 12 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/small&gt;&lt;!-- Template:Unsigned --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;<br /> <br /> <br /> :Spain's constitutional Court is not the only POV ,and obviously is an interested POV. It is internationally accepted that part of the Catalan population feels Catalonia as a nation. It is a case very similar to Quebec so no such debate makes sense. The spanish constituional court is just an interested part in the conflict.[[Special:Contributions/95.61.18.160|95.61.18.160]] ([[User talk:95.61.18.160|talk]]) 19:03, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::For an encyclopedia the only valid POV is the legal POV, and in Spain the Constituctional Court's decissions are definitives. If Wikipedia doesn't respect that, a lot of other articles must be corrected. Scotland, for example, is only a historical country of United Kingdom or is a nation? I am Spanish but I respect the Catalan nationalism, as it has perfect historical foundations, and I think they are a nation, of course, but include social or personal POV in a section intended to the political situation, whatever it is, for better or for worse, is not encyclopedic. [[Special:Contributions/Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]]) 12:00, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Arkarull, the decission about nation/nationality is not any personal POV but it's sufficently backed up by legal texts. The Constitutional Court has ruled that the term 'nation' ''stands'' on Catalonia's autonomy charter's preamble, which, by the way, doubles as an organical law of the Spanish State (ie. passed by both Congress and Senate). <br /> <br /> :Whether or not this has legal consequences (it has not, according to the Court) is of no importance to Wikipedia. The point here is that the law (Spanish as well as Catalan) '''describes''' Catalonia as a nation. And all we do here in WP is to describe things.<br /> <br /> :Now: the Spanish Constitution does also acknowlege that Spain is made up of regions and nationalities. The fact that no list has been made as to which territories qualify as regions and which ones as nationalities doesn't mean that we ''all'' know who's who here: Is Catalonia a nationality? For sure. Is La Rioja a nationality? Of course not.<br /> <br /> :Finally, once we've accepted the 'nationality' terms as experessed in the Spanish Constitution, a purely linguistic point kicks into: 'nationality' implies the existence of a 'nation'. As Wikipedia states:<br /> <br /> ::Nationality is membership of a nation ''or'' sovereign state. Nationality can be acquired by being born within the jurisdiction of a state, by inheriting it from parents, or by a process of naturalization. ...<br /> ::en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationality<br /> <br /> :Therefore, if we accept the Constitutional existence of nationalities, it automatically derives in the existence of nations.<br /> <br /> [[User:Eva Grossjean|Eva Grossjean]] ([[User talk:Eva Grossjean|talk]]) 11:36, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::Ok, Eva, we both agree in that for us Catalonia is a Nation. But I think thar for legal purposes is not a clear idea:<br /> :::'''''Artículo 2 de la Constitución Española''': La Constitución se fundamenta en la indisoluble unidad de la Nación española, patria común e indivisible de todos los españoles, y reconoce y garantiza el derecho a la autonomía de las nacionalidades y regiones que la integran y la solidaridad entre todas ellas''. ('''Article 2 of the Spanish Constitution''': The Constitution is based on the indissoluble unity of the Spanish Nation, common and indivisible homeland of all Spanish, and recognizes and guarantees the right to autonomy of nationalities and regions which comprise and solidarity among them.)<br /> ::Therefore, the Constitution accepts the existence of &quot;nationalities&quot;, but aggregated into a single Nation, the Spanish. As a result, the Constitutional Court ruled that the designation as a nation that does the Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia (2006) in its preamble has no legal validity. Wikipedia's article for''nationality''not worth me because, as one librarian of this encyclopedia said to me once, Wikipedia is not Wikipedia's reference.<br /> ::In any case, this debate is sterile because the article has already been corrected by someone, replacing &quot;nation&quot; with &quot;nationality.&quot; &lt;small&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Arkarull|Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Arkarull|contribs]]) 17:47, 13 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/small&gt;&lt;!-- Template:Unsigned --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;<br /> <br /> <br /> Nations are not defined solely by Constitutions, mon cher Arkarull.<br /> <br /> If that was the case, the USA could never be considered a nation, since a definition of the United States as a nation is nowhere to be seen in there. And yet, they are a nation--and what a nation, by the way!<br /> <br /> Britain, on the other hand, does not even have a written Constitution to back her nationhood. And yet, it is another nation.<br /> <br /> As I wrote before in this forum, some people mix 'statehood' with 'nationhood'. Gross mistake: sometimes they might coincide, but some other times they might not.<br /> <br /> This legalistic insistence on the Spanish Constitution demonstrates, if anything, a large degree of intellectual laziness.<br /> <br /> xxx<br /> [[Special:Contributions/81.39.12.15|81.39.12.15]] ([[User talk:81.39.12.15|talk]]) 16:21, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Absolutely, my condescending friend, but I guess you'll understand that I defends the rights of a country, in this case mine, to be judge by its own rules. So, as you agree that in Spain some territories are called Autonomous Comunities, while in USA they call States as well as relevant laws stipulate, when their functions are almost identical, we can also accept that the political and legal definitions are framed in Spanish constitutional frameworks that set Spanish as the only Nation, not excluding the existence of nationalities. You can consider this stupid, centralist or incoherent, but it is what it is. And it is says by one of the few Spanish, born in Madrid, who consider Catalonia a nation. But I also differentiate between what I think and what is legally OK, that's what fits in this discussion. And I differentiate clearly between state and nation, thanks. Furthermore, I believe that you can defend yours opinions without resorting to insult.<br /> And sorry for my poor English. It's probably my &quot;large degree of intellectual laziness&quot;. &lt;small&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Arkarull|Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Arkarull|contribs]]) 18:11, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> ::''Mon cher'' Arkarull,<br /> <br /> ::It is not an insult, it's just a depiction. Using the Spanish Constitution as the holy graal, the only source of description of an otherwise lively, diverse country it's empoverishing and, yes, intellectually lazy (Spaniards, having suffered long centuries of Inquisition and even longer centuries of narrow-minded Catholicism are particulatly prone to this sort of mechanical, one-sided reasoning. I feel really sorry for you, ''mon cher ami'', for having missed the benefits of the Protestant Reformation).<br /> <br /> ::Nations are '''not''' defined by Constitutions--at least not ''only'' by Constitutions. If that was the case, neither the United States nor the United Kingdom would qualify as such, as there's no mention about their nationhood in their Constitutions (or ''non''-Constitutions, such as in the British case). <br /> <br /> ::You can copy/paste as many articles of your Constitution as you like, ''mon chéri''. Your argument simply does not hold water. Constitutionalists do not make or break nations, nor judges. It's the people who make them by enbodying them. Catalonia's nationhood, in that regard, is out of the question. <br /> <br /> ::Please, be so kind so as to provide more solid lines of argument in order to deny Catalonia's nationhood. Any qualified source (please, no Constitutional scarecrows) will be warmly welcome.<br /> <br /> ::[[User:Eva Grossjean|Eva Grossjean]] ([[User talk:Eva Grossjean|talk]]) 20:22, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Ok, Eva. I will not go into your game. In any case you should know that sociology has evolved a bit since Weber. It's amazing how in one paragraph you have insulted Spain, the Spanish, the Catholic tradition, and so on. You should review a little the History before returning to the topics of the Inquisition and the innate stupidity transmitted through Catholicism. I will repeat it again to see if you can assimilate without insulting even if you disagree:<br /> <br /> * I believe strongly that Catalonia is a nation in its own right.<br /> * I do not disapprove the inclusion in the article the conflict nation-no nation, I support that and not go any opinion, and of course they are present nationalist claims as Catalonia has a long historical journey as an independent nation.<br /> * But I have to accept that Catalonia, today, like it or not, is part of Spain, and LEGALLY, the only valid laws are the spanish ones, are laws adopted by the Congress of Deputies, the Catalan Parliament or constitutional requirements. Do you want to get in a philosophical, sociological and political discussion about the right to be a nation of Catalonia? Isn't necessary. We would agree, although it seems you do not read my messages because you repeat that I do not believe this reality. But one thing is what you or I believe and the truth is other one. I think the death penalty is unfair and out of any right, but I accept that if I go to Texas and commit a particular crime will be sentenced to death penalty. Put that in Texas there is no death penalty because there are groups against, even if for me they are right, it would be illogical. <br /> * I'd tried to talk with you with respect. I can be wrong, but to prove you must present something more than insults and condescension. Of course I love my country, like you love yours I supossed, but that doesn't mean that I'm not capable of assimilating other realities.<br /> * Surprise! I am Spanish and I'm not stupid! You'll be surprised, but this is a beautiful country, with very good people and a great History. And also great professionals, scientists and intellectuals. I invite you to visit us and know our history to prevent fall in outdated clichés.<br /> * Finally. I'm not your ''mon chéri''. Although these chocolates are very good. If you're not going to bring nothing but insults I ask you to stop posting messages and let a more polite and fruitful discussion. Don't forget that I have started this not to impose my vision, when I could have deleted the term &quot;nation&quot; in the article simply.--[[User:Arkarull|Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]]) 22:28, 14 July 2010 (UTC)</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikiquette_assistance&diff=373521132 2010-07-14T22:18:43Z

<p>Arkarull: /* Eva Grossjean */</p> <hr /> <div>__NEWSECTIONLINK__<br /> <br /> [[Category:Wikipedia dispute resolution]]<br /> <br /> {{Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts/Beginning}}<br /> <br /> {{User:MiszaBot/config<br /> |archiveheader = {{archivemainpage|Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts}}<br /> |maxarchivesize = 200K<br /> |counter = 88<br /> |minthreadsleft = 1<br /> |minthreadstoarchive = 1<br /> |algo = old(5d)<br /> |archive = Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts/archive%(counter)d<br /> }}{{noindex}}<br /> <br /> [[Category:Non-talk pages that are automatically signed]]<br /> <br /> &lt;!-- NOTE: If the archive navbox needs a new row, update [[Template:Wikiquette alerts/Archive navbox]]. This must be done manually, but the process should be pretty self-explanatory once you open the template. --&gt;<br /> <br /> = Active alerts =<br /> <br /> == {{User|John Halloran}} ==<br /> <br /> {{archivetop}}<br /> {{Stale|1=No recent updates to the thread, so it seems either the behaviour has stopped or there's nothing to do here. &lt;span id=&quot;sig&quot; style=&quot;background:#FFFFC0&quot;&gt;'''[[User:Giftiger_wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Verdana&quot; color=&quot;#900000&quot;&gt;Giftiger&lt;font color=&quot;#FF0000&quot;&gt;Wunsch&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;]]''' [[User_talk:Giftiger wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Tahoma&quot; color=&quot;#0060A0&quot;&gt;[TALK]&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/span&gt; 10:03, 12 July 2010 (UTC)}}<br /> <br /> *:I think of it more as a failure of this board. The behaviour was ongoing and has only stopped as the editor in question has stopped editing. In future I'll take problems to ANI or elsewhere as the board seems to have outlived its usefulness, especially in such an egregious and obvious case as this. &lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Papyrus&quot;&gt;[[User:Verbal|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#C72&quot;&gt;Verbal&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;small&gt;[[User talk:Verbal#top|&lt;span style=&quot;color:Gray;&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/span&gt; 10:15, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> *:: I'm sorry, I can't agree. Perhaps the comment was a bit hard, but compared to the constant attacks you get in many discussions this is quite civil. In this case, reminding [[User:John Halloran]] about [[WP:NPA]] should have been enough. The &quot;attack&quot; is mild, prompted by the other users incorrect behavior and there is no repetition. I'm not an admin, but had I been there would have been no action. That said, I do agree that this should not have gone stale, it should have been closed as no action a long time ago. --[[User:OpenFuture|OpenFuture]] ([[User talk:OpenFuture|talk]]) 10:22, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> *::: Open, considering we are involved in a dispute where you have been very uncivil I'm not surprised by your reasoning. However, calling someone a religious fanatic, trying to ban them from a page, saying they are a vandal, saying they have no knowledge, questioning their qualifications, etc etc are clearly uncivil - per policy. It should have been met with at least a high level warning and probably a block. Calling this &quot;mild&quot; is disingenuous at best. I did nothing to prompt his attacks, except follow guidelines and policy, and my edits have stood review - to characterise them as &quot;incorrect&quot; is itself, incorrect - and note I gave reasons. &lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Papyrus&quot;&gt;[[User:Verbal|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#C72&quot;&gt;Verbal&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;small&gt;[[User talk:Verbal#top|&lt;span style=&quot;color:Gray;&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/span&gt; 10:29, 12 July 2010 (UTC) <br /> ===Complaint===<br /> This recent edit by an editor I have been in (civil, on my part) dispute with is going too far in my opinion: [https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AAstrology_software&amp;action=historysubmit&amp;diff=371583225&amp;oldid=371581983 &quot;Her 'top university' is probably a Christian school, and to a religious fanatic, the ends justify the means.&quot;] Although ridiculous, I don't consider the &quot;She&quot; part a personal attack - I also haven't claimed special authority based on qualifications.<br /> <br /> It shouldn't take long to review his edits, there haven't been many recently. We first &quot;crossed swords&quot; at the [[Astrology software]] article where I noticed it may be a copyvio of another page based on the other page's copyright date. Moonriddengirl dealt with this issue perfectly. John seems to have taken it as an attempt to get the article deleted. When the article was restored I attempted to clean it up, and was met with resistance by John - a major contributor who claims to have written the article along with others who are also, like him, the authors of astrological/horoscope software mentioned in the article. He then made six edits to the article undoing my copyediting with the edit summary &quot;Undid revision xx by Verbal Undo vandalism by biased user&quot; [https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w/index.php?title=Astrology_software&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=370840585 diff]. I was polite and explained that this wasn't vandalism and pointed John to the relevant policies, and even apologised that there were so many. In return he stated I shouldn't edit the article (&quot;user Verbal should be disqualified from editing this page&quot;,&quot;A person who knows nothing about the field should leave the decision of relevance up to those who do know.&quot;, etc), said wikipedia shouldn't be edited by High school students, says I should be too busy too edit wikipedia if I had a PhD (shows what he knows!), and then goes on to further question my credentials and compare me to Essjay.[https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w/index.php?title=Talk:Astrology_software&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=371400041 diff] He also keeps bringing up typos which seems a bit silly and is due to using a French keyboard at the moment. In all my replies and dealings with John I've been polite and civil. His last two actions were the post I first mention, which I feel goes too far, and an off topic discussion about a love of rules rather than knowledge.<br /> <br /> If this continues this editor may need to take a break. Opinions, advice, etc welcome. Thanks, &lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Papyrus&quot;&gt;[[User:Verbal|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#C72&quot;&gt;Verbal&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;small&gt;[[User talk:Verbal#top|&lt;span style=&quot;color:Gray;&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/span&gt; 19:38, 3 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::You already said on your discussion page that you were going to take a break in order to give birth to a child. [[User:John Halloran|John Halloran]] ([[User talk:John Halloran|talk]]) 20:31, 3 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::I don't think so. I did say elsewhere I was going to be a dad soon. I specifically haven't complained about the &quot;She&quot;, that's not a problem (unless you do it again now you know). Would you care to address the actual concerns, such as the clear implication that I am a religious fanatic? I've asked you on the talk page to remove that comment. Thanks, &lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Papyrus&quot;&gt;[[User:Verbal|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#C72&quot;&gt;Verbal&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;small&gt;[[User talk:Verbal#top|&lt;span style=&quot;color:Gray;&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/span&gt; 20:45, 3 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :I belive that the user may need mentoring. He seems to have some knowledge of the field, yet seems to be unable to crasp that that dose not give him the right to ignore rules about RS or OR.[[User:Slatersteven|Slatersteven]] ([[User talk:Slatersteven|talk]]) 19:50, 3 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::Agree: a mentor would probably be a good option here to help the user contribute constructively. As for the &quot;religious fanatic&quot; comment, a polite warning to [[WP:AGF|assume good faith]] and remember to maintain civility when participating in discussions wouldn't go amiss. &lt;span id=&quot;gw_sig&quot; style=&quot;background:#FFFFC0&quot;&gt;'''[[User:Giftiger_wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Verdana&quot; color=&quot;#900000&quot;&gt;Giftiger&lt;font color=&quot;#FF0000&quot;&gt;Wunsch&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;]]''' [[User_talk:Giftiger wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Tahoma&quot; color=&quot;#0060A0&quot;&gt;[TALK]&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/span&gt; 11:59, 5 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> *Still waiting for input. If my description was too long I will refactor. Basically, &quot;religious fanatic&quot; is going too far. &lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Papyrus&quot;&gt;[[User:Verbal|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#C72&quot;&gt;Verbal&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;small&gt;[[User talk:Verbal#top|&lt;span style=&quot;color:Gray;&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/span&gt; 08:28, 4 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> **Does no one have an opinion on this at all? &lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Papyrus&quot;&gt;[[User:Verbal|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#C72&quot;&gt;Verbal&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;small&gt;[[User talk:Verbal#top|&lt;span style=&quot;color:Gray;&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/span&gt; 11:51, 5 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ***Did you leave the user a polite message to remember to maintain civility before posting this here? I looked on their talk page but didn't see such a comment. This should always be the first action you take; don't forget that [[WP:WQA]] is here to render advice and opinions on civility issues and/or to refer the matters to other noticeboards. You should try to deal with the matter yourself before advice becomes necessary, and in this case a polite comment about maintaining civility or request to retract the statement that you are a &quot;religious&quot; fanatic would have sufficed unless the user refused to address your concerns civilly. &lt;span id=&quot;gw_sig&quot; style=&quot;background:#FFFFC0&quot;&gt;'''[[User:Giftiger_wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Verdana&quot; color=&quot;#900000&quot;&gt;Giftiger&lt;font color=&quot;#FF0000&quot;&gt;Wunsch&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;]]''' [[User_talk:Giftiger wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Tahoma&quot; color=&quot;#0060A0&quot;&gt;[TALK]&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/span&gt; 12:06, 5 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ****Yes I did, and I was polite to them on the article talk page and asked them to calm down. Would you actually like to read and respond to the problematic behaviour, or do you think it is fine? &lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Papyrus&quot;&gt;[[User:Verbal|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#C72&quot;&gt;Verbal&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;small&gt;[[User talk:Verbal#top|&lt;span style=&quot;color:Gray;&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/span&gt; 12:52, 5 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> All I can suggest is that you should have discussed the problem with the user and/or issued a level 1 npa warning and let that be that. [[WP:WQA]] is here to help resolve issues of incivility and exists only to render advice and/or refer the issue to a relevant noticeboard. Incivility is inevitably going to happen during the consensus-building process, and while I agree that calling someone a &quot;religious fanatic&quot; is a personal attack, IMO it's a pretty minor one and could have been dealt with via polite discussion and/or npa template until it became a more serious problem. &lt;span id=&quot;gw_sig&quot; style=&quot;background:#FFFFC0&quot;&gt;'''[[User:Giftiger_wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Verdana&quot; color=&quot;#900000&quot;&gt;Giftiger&lt;font color=&quot;#FF0000&quot;&gt;Wunsch&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;]]''' [[User_talk:Giftiger wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Tahoma&quot; color=&quot;#0060A0&quot;&gt;[TALK]&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/span&gt; 13:13, 6 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :Well this board is certainly useful. Thanks for nothing. The only advice is slap a template on them. Yes sir, that would have deescalated the problem. Sorry Giftiger, as I know your advice is well meant, but it is wrong and would have made the situation worse in this case. There is no point in my talking to them, as they have already said I should be banned and that I am a religious fanatic that should be ignored and talking to them makes it worse. &lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Papyrus&quot;&gt;[[User:Verbal|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#C72&quot;&gt;Verbal&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;small&gt;[[User talk:Verbal#top|&lt;span style=&quot;color:Gray;&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/span&gt; 21:16, 7 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::If you find that talking with the user isn't going to help, then I'd say just avoid them. While calling someone a &quot;religious fanatic&quot; isn't very pleasant, it's not really worthy of much more than a warning about civility. Just avoid them where possible, and if they make any particularly malicious remarks they could be taken to [[WP:AN/I]] at a later date. &lt;span id=&quot;gw_sig&quot; style=&quot;background:#FFFFC0&quot;&gt;'''[[User:Giftiger_wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Verdana&quot; color=&quot;#900000&quot;&gt;Giftiger&lt;font color=&quot;#FF0000&quot;&gt;Wunsch&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;]]''' [[User_talk:Giftiger wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Tahoma&quot; color=&quot;#0060A0&quot;&gt;[TALK]&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/span&gt; 21:29, 7 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Off topic===<br /> <br /> Ummm, Verbal... if [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Verbal&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=371842311 this] is an &quot;accusation of bad faith&quot; - what exactly is [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts&amp;diff=371828614&amp;oldid=371828022 this]? I wouldn't [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=371836094 &quot;request opinions&quot;] on open threads if you're not prepared for responses that might not be to your liking. [[User:Doc9871|Doc9871]] ([[User talk:Doc9871|talk]]) 13:05, 5 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> *Doc9871, what's the relevance to this thread? Verbal, please don't collapse other people's comments since you have pretty clear motives for wanting to removing Doc's comments. It's not exactly relevant to the thread, but collapsing it should be at the discretion of an uninvolved party. &lt;span id=&quot;gw_sig&quot; style=&quot;background:#FFFFC0&quot;&gt;'''[[User:Giftiger_wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Verdana&quot; color=&quot;#900000&quot;&gt;Giftiger&lt;font color=&quot;#FF0000&quot;&gt;Wunsch&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;]]''' [[User_talk:Giftiger wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Tahoma&quot; color=&quot;#0060A0&quot;&gt;[TALK]&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/span&gt; 18:18, 5 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> **My clear motive is that it is off topic and rude. &lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Papyrus&quot;&gt;[[User:Verbal|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#C72&quot;&gt;Verbal&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;small&gt;[[User talk:Verbal#top|&lt;span style=&quot;color:Gray;&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/span&gt; 18:38, 5 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Verbal is on a personal vendetta here. Experienced users (or at least users trying to throw their weight around policing articles) going after inexperienced users over petty breaches of wikiquette is a rather pathetic spectacle in this editor's opinion. --[[User:Dbachmann|dab]] &lt;small&gt;[[User_talk:Dbachmann|(𒁳)]]&lt;/small&gt; 10:43, 6 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :This is not true. Being called a &quot;religious fanatic&quot; (despite never mentioning religion!) when I have been polite and helpful is clearly a problem. You put this comment in the right section at least. &lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Papyrus&quot;&gt;[[User:Verbal|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#C72&quot;&gt;Verbal&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;small&gt;[[User talk:Verbal#top|&lt;span style=&quot;color:Gray;&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/span&gt; 13:08, 6 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> {{archivebottom}}<br /> {{collapse top|Unrelated to the thread and added after its archival}}<br /> The claim that I have been uncivil is incorrect. If you think I have, please start a WQA providing diffs of this supposed incivility. --[[User:OpenFuture|OpenFuture]] ([[User talk:OpenFuture|talk]]) 10:51, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :Please see Mass killings/communist regimes where I point it out and ask you not to do so in future. This thread is closed. See [[WP:DR]] if you want to take it further. &lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Papyrus&quot;&gt;[[User:Verbal|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#C72&quot;&gt;Verbal&lt;/b&gt;]] &lt;small&gt;[[User talk:Verbal#top|&lt;span style=&quot;color:Gray;&quot;&gt;chat&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/span&gt; 12:06, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> {{collapse bottom}}<br /> <br /> == User:Ddd1600 ==<br /> <br /> [[User:Ddd1600]] chastises me [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Libertarianism&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=371277229 here] for demanding article content be supported with [[WP:RS]] writing among other things: &quot;Abandon your project with regards to this page. Your un-natural regard for authority alone reveals you as the ANTITHESIS of a libertarian. Go away, you're not providing value here.&quot; Could someone explain wikiquette to him? [[User:Carolmooredc|CarolMooreDC]] ([[User talk:Carolmooredc|talk]]) 16:57, 4 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :I left a hand written note on his page, for what it's worth (The whole &quot;I'm objective! I'm objective!&quot; vibe from his user page and his talk page kinda sets off my spidey sense). [[User:Ian.thomson|Ian.thomson]] ([[User talk:Ian.thomson|talk]]) 21:35, 4 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::'''disagree''' Carol has been the primary editor for some time on the libertarianism article. a suggestion was made on the talk page for Carol to take a week off, which she refused. many times Carol has accused me of soapbox, yet remains highly visible in the article as well as discussion page. is it possible that you are actually the soapboxer here? please reconsider a voluntary break from the libertarianism article. [[User:Darkstar1st|Darkstar1st]] ([[User talk:Darkstar1st|talk]]) 22:05, 4 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::I haven't exactly crossed paths with you or CarolMooreDC before, but based on what I saw from Ddd1600's contributions, I'm not going to withdraw my note to him. I cannot speak for other situations, but Ddd1600 did repeatedly make a bunch of edits that were unsourced, sometimes removing sourced information, and in this instance, his remarks were uncalled for. If you have any issues with CarolMooreDC, that's your business, not mine. The issue here is Ddd1600's behavior, if you want to file a report in the NPOV board, ANI/I, or whatever, fine. And if she wants to file a report about you, fine. Considering the ANI report on you I've found, it's really only [[WP:AGF]] that's keeping me from being a lot more blunt in saying I think you'll need plenty more evidence than she will. [[User:Ian.thomson|Ian.thomson]] ([[User talk:Ian.thomson|talk]]) 22:51, 4 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::::It's fully possible that both are at fault here, even if I couldn't see any examples of CarolMooreDC doing anything wrong. But even so I think Ddd1600's comment was wrong, and I agree with Ian.thomsons viewpoint and note to Ddd1600. --[[User:OpenFuture|OpenFuture]] ([[User talk:OpenFuture|talk]]) 03:11, 5 July 2010 (UTC) <br /> <br /> :::::Ian, welcome to wp. your 1st year of contributions has helped wp. being an editor for far longer, i have seen many come and go. i feel the same as the founder when he said, &quot;senior editors are making fewer contribution because of the attitude here. more people are focusing on wp:rules and less on content. an above complaint about another editor saying &quot;you make no sense&quot; strikes me as childish. [[User:Darkstar1st|Darkstar1st]] ([[User talk:Darkstar1st|talk]]) 13:02, 5 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::::::I've been here since 2006, and active since 2007. Please don't patronize me. I'm not quite following you for the rest of your post, could you be less vague? I don't want to get involved in the above argument between you, TFD, OpenFuture, ''et al'', so please do not try to draw me into it. [[User:Ian.thomson|Ian.thomson]] ([[User talk:Ian.thomson|talk]]) 18:35, 5 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::::::apologies Ian, a search of your talk page/earliest comes up december 09. Carol has contributed to the libertarianism page more than most, as well as being the primary reason for the article being listed as a philosophy page, we all owe her a great debt for her help. her edits have become so prevalent, others have grown tired of her influence &quot;your project&quot;, and have expressed a desire for new voices. her complaining about another editor &quot;chastises me&quot; seems a bit much. [[User:Darkstar1st|Darkstar1st]] ([[User talk:Darkstar1st|talk]]) 19:15, 5 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> &lt;--Note that ''[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Libertarianism&amp;curid=3851163&amp;diff=372689133&amp;oldid=372673029 at this diff]'' [[User:68.59.4.188]] added a similar hostile comment to USer:Ddd1600 after my response to him. I ask at the diff if they are the same person. Both have edited the article frequently of late. Waiting for response. (Not sure how to deal with the issue if neither answers the question which would leave the impression they are the same person who just prefers to use both identifies which I'm sure is vs. wiki policies.) Thanks. [[User:Carolmooredc|CarolMooreDC]] ([[User talk:Carolmooredc|talk]]) 04:00, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == User:Captmonkey ==<br /> <br /> I'd just thought It would be good to bring up some incivility from [[User:Captmonkey]] on [[talk:North London derby#St Totteringham's Day|here]], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:North_London_derby#Third_opinion here] and [[talk:North London derby#St Totteringham's Day &amp; St Hotspurs' Day|here]] insulting me and other editors and a certain subject he disagrees with. [[User:Exxolon]] has listed every peice of incivility from Captmonkey [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive624#Action_required_over_St._Totteringham.27s_day here] on [[WP:ANI]]. Please forgive me if i've lain it out wrong as it's my first report here. I didn't want to have to do this but I feel it should be adressed. [[User:The C of E|The C of E. God Save The Queen!]] ([[User talk:The C of E|talk]]) 07:51, 9 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Well he's not edited since the previous ANI so this might be somewhat stale already. The issue isn't so much in how that you laid out the report but in the fact that you failed to notify the user (in accordance with the instructions above). Obviously, if he continues to make inappropriate remarks, then ANI would be the place as he really should know better by now, and I don't think a great deal can be done here to help. [[User:Ncmvocalist|Ncmvocalist]] ([[User talk:Ncmvocalist|talk]]) 08:33, 9 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Wiki-Hounding, Cyberstalking and Bullying ==<br /> <br /> Wiki-Hounding, Cyberstalking and Bullying<br /> <br /> I am forced to object to the activities performed by Ckatz and Johnuniq against me in the following articles:<br /> <br /> {{la|Print on demand}}&lt;br&gt;<br /> {{la|InstaBook}}&lt;br&gt;<br /> {{la|Victor Celorio}}<br /> <br /> For a long time now, the editors in question have shown repeatedly a very strong bias against my entries in those articles. They follow me around and either erase my entries without explanation or they try to disqualify my entries in the articles in which I've participated by placing unfounded tags without any concrete proof or evidence. The implications of those tags are that there is something wrong or false with my entries, when every assertion I've made has been backed by independent secondary references that comply with the requirements set by Wikipedia. I have gone so far as to reference just about EVERY SINGLE LINE I write to make sure of this.<br /> <br /> However these editors, for unexplained reasons all of their own, have been going out of their way to erase my entries, tag the articles in which I participate and/or try to bully me into erasing perfectly valid secondary references. Ckatz has refused to answer my questions and has in turn tagged my articles, again, without any explanation at all. <br /> <br /> He has been assisted by another user named Johnuniq, who jumps in to answer my questions instead of Ckatz (they both may be the same person, I don't know). Johnuniq is the one that in those 3 articles tries to bully me into deleting valid secondary references for unexplained reasons.<br /> <br /> Both Ckatz and Johnuniq are not interested in suggesting any improvements to any of the the articles mentioned: they just try to block me and demean the articles.<br /> <br /> I have asked them politely why are they doing this and I have constrained myself from starting a little war of insertions and deletions as the policies of Wikipedia indicate.<br /> <br /> I have followed Wikipedia rules. My entries are limited to state the facts without any conclusion or statement from me, and I have included plenty of reliable references (Secondary and tertiary, as indicated by Wikipedia). <br /> <br /> It seems to me a blatant Wiki-Hounding, Cyberstalking and Bullying with an undeniable bias against me personally and/or against the subject of those articles for unknown reasons. Therefore I request formally an investigation into this matter. [[User:Llambert|Llambert]] ([[User talk:Llambert|talk]]) 18:30, 7 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> : You don't seem to have edited here in the last two months, and just glancing at your contribution history, I can't see where your contributions have been deleted, nor can I see where you've been threatened with being blocked. Can you be more specific, please? [[User:Dayewalker|Dayewalker]] ([[User talk:Dayewalker|talk]]) 18:37, 7 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :I think I'm going to have to agree with Dayewalker - I had a look at the talkpages, and there's just too much to look at. It looks like Johnuniq has tried to explain matters on a few of the talkpages, but I gather you have further issues? [[User talk:TFOWR|&lt;b style=&quot;color:#000&quot;&gt;TFOW&lt;/b&gt;&lt;b style=&quot;color:#F00&quot;&gt;R&lt;/b&gt;]] 18:57, 7 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::I am watching this page and so have noticed this report. If anyone has any questions please ask here. [[User:Johnuniq|Johnuniq]] ([[User talk:Johnuniq|talk]]) 03:32, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Dayewalker:<br /> I am sorry, but I never wrote that I had &quot;been threatened with being blocked&quot;, as you say. In regards to my not editing in the last few months, I followed Wikipedia guidelines and stopped editing so as to let matters cool off. <br /> <br /> The demands (what you call explanations) I was getting from Johnuniq, were not aimed at improving the article but on the contrary, to demean it. His intervention was prompted evidently by my asking questions to Ckatz, as to why he was tagging my articles and erasing my entries, so I have to assume he was speaking for him.<br /> <br /> Johnuniq followed me around, just as did ckatz, in all the articles I participated on, watching my entries and erasing or changing my entries. In the Print On Demand Article, for example, references and links I provided were changed or deleted. Furthermore, in the InstaBook article, Johnuniq demanded that I erase perfectly valid references to US patents and magazine articles, something which I found very strange. <br /> <br /> I think it is very telling that ckatz never answered my questions, and instead it was Johnuniq who came forth everytime, in any and all of the articles I participate. If they are not the same person, it is clear that one does the deed, and the other tries to back him up. [[User:Llambert|Llambert]] ([[User talk:Llambert|talk]]) 14:08, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> : I'm sorry, I still can't see what you're talking about. Looking at your contributions, it does look like Johnuniq reverted you once on [[Victor Celorio]], reinserting a COI tag here [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Victor_Celorio&amp;action=historysubmit&amp;diff=335728997&amp;oldid=335681340]. That was January 3rd of this year, over six months ago. Your contact with Johnuniq on [[Talk:Print on demand]] seems polite, and four months old. On [[InstaBook]], the discussion is also six months old and the only direct contact I see is when Ckatz reverted you here [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=InstaBook&amp;action=historysubmit&amp;diff=335911218&amp;oldid=335887895] to readd a COI and an ADVERT tag. <br /> <br /> : If you'll read [[WP:DIFF]], you can see how to make a DIFF of a particular edit, as I've done above. It would help us understand what you're trying to say if you could give us specific instances of edits you have a problem with. [[User:Dayewalker|Dayewalker]] ([[User talk:Dayewalker|talk]]) 07:03, 9 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::Dayewalker, you are already mentioning some of the specific edits that I am complaining about, but let me ask you a couple of questions before we go on.<br /> <br /> ::1.- Do you think it is proper for an editor to tag the articles of another editor, with no proof whatsoever of his accusations? <br /> <br /> ::According to Wikipedia guidelines regarding COI tags it is not:<br /> <br /> :::&quot;Using COI allegations to harass an editor or to gain the upper hand in a content dispute is prohibited, and can result in a block or ban.&quot;<br /> <br /> ::Here is the complete quote:<br /> ::&quot;Dealing with suspected conflicted editors<br /> ::The first approach should be direct discussion of the issue with the editor, referring to this guideline. If persuasion fails, consider whether you are involved in a content dispute. If so, an early recourse to dispute resolution may help. Another option is to initiate discussion at WP:COIN, where experienced editors may be able to help you resolve the matter without recourse to publishing assertions and accusations on Wikipedia. Using COI allegations to harass an editor or to gain the upper hand in a content dispute is prohibited, and can result in a block or ban.&quot;<br /> <br /> ::Both ckatz and Johnuniq did NOT follow the guidelines to place a COI tag, and they did tag my articles precisely as a way to &quot;harass an editor or to gain the upper hand in a content dispute&quot;. ckatz did it on December 15, 2009, right after I deleted some unsourced entries I found in those articles, following Wikipedia guidelines. As a response to my deletion, ckatz tagged all of my articles. You can check the date on the tags. <br /> <br /> ::That is my entire point and the one that gave origin to this entire incident. And this is what I like to correct. If you still cannot &quot;see it&quot;, I'll be glad to provide you with the diffs.<br /> <br /> ::2.- Is there a time limit to request an investigation? I ask this because you keep mentioning that this happened some time ago and I don't see the relevance since the problem persists still. &lt;small&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Llambert|Llambert]] ([[User talk:Llambert|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Llambert|contribs]]) 19:46, 9 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/small&gt;&lt;!-- Template:Unsigned --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;<br /> :::It seems that a lot of the angst here is coming from whether or not the article should be tagged with a COI tag. So let me just ask this: Are you connected to the product in such a way that you would have a potential conflict of interest? &amp;mdash; [[User:E. Ripley|e. ripley]]\&lt;sup&gt;[[User talk:E. Ripley|talk]]&lt;/sup&gt; 19:51, 9 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::::See also [[WP:BOOMERANG]].--[[User:SarekOfVulcan|SarekOfVulcan]] ([[User talk:SarekOfVulcan|talk]]) 19:55, 9 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::::: In all honesty, if you're asking people to dig up diffs from last December and block or ban other editors, it's not going to happen. Looking at those articles, E. Ripley's question above about involvement and COI certainly seems to be a good one. Also, do you have any connection to the account {{user|Playa27}}? [[User:Dayewalker|Dayewalker]] ([[User talk:Dayewalker|talk]]) 20:06, 9 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::::::: Man, that internet is something. Nice call, ER. [[User:Dayewalker|Dayewalker]] ([[User talk:Dayewalker|talk]]) 20:25, 9 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::::::::Yes, I also would like to know if there is any connection between Llsmbert and Instabook, and between Llambert and Victor Celerio. If this isn't denied, I'm quite happy with the COI tag. Not that I'm unhappy with it now, mind you. What I am unhappy with is Llambert's complaining about it without commenting on any possible relationship. Makes it hard to AGF. &lt;small&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Dougweller|Dougweller]] ([[User talk:Dougweller|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dougweller|contribs]]) 20:58, 9 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/small&gt;&lt;!-- Template:Unsigned --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;<br /> <br /> <br /> ::Well, your responses are interesting, and I take it they mean that you all think that it is proper not to follow the guidelines set by Wikipedia. Wow! So the following question would be, why bother then with the rules and guidelines? <br /> <br /> ::And it is not angst: they are just questions. I don't understand the aggressive tone in the responses to my questions. <br /> <br /> ::By the way, the second part of the Wikipedia rules on how to handle COI, says the following.<br /> <br /> ::&quot;Wikipedia places importance on both the neutrality of articles and the ability of editors to edit pseudonymously. Do not out an editor's real life identity in order to prove a conflict of interest. Wikipedia's policy against harassment prohibits this. COI situations are usually revealed when the editor themself discloses a relationship to the subject that they are editing. In case the editor does not identify themself or their affiliation, reference to the neutral point of view policy may help counteract biased editing.&quot;<br /> <br /> ::So, according to the rules, what matters is the writing and the references provided in the article itself. Or are you going to ask me also if I wrote those press articles and magazines essays? Are you going to ask me if I have a connection to the encyclopedias and the New York Times and all the hundreds of articles that have been written about the subject, and a connection to all of the other editors that have contributed to it? Because the moment you ask about one, then you are asking about all of them. <br /> <br /> ::And no, I am not complaining about the tags themselves. The article has been tagged before. I am complaining about how those tags were used: as a response to my erasing unsourced material placed in the article back in December. That's it: pure and simple harassment. I didn't even add anything to the article back then: I just erased bad material, trying to keep the article clean as indicated by Wikipedia. And the response from ckatz was the tags and deletions, left and right.<br /> <br /> ::I must conclude by your responses that you all believe it is ok to tag articles as a weapon and just for the fun of it, instead of following the rules.<br /> <br /> ::And then you wonder why Wikipedia has such a bad reputation in academic circles...<br /> [[User:Llambert|Llambert]] ([[User talk:Llambert|talk]]) 00:12, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::Actually, Wikipedia has a bad reputation in academic circles because academic circles are mostly occupied my older people who are just now figuring out this brand new &quot;email&quot; thing and get us mixed up with &lt;s&gt;TVtropes, Facebook, and Encyclopedia Dramatica&lt;/s&gt; 4chan. Even when they know who we are, they don't understand that we're not an academic source, and never will be. We're general reference, major difference. You don't cite Wikipedia in a paper for the same reason you don't cite Encyclopedia Brittanica, it's either something you shouldn't need to cite (common knowledge) or something you should be going into more detail with, using a better source.<br /> :::Also, you may wanna check out [[WP:SPADE]]. There hasn't been any outing yet (just statements of suspicion and questioning regarding possible involvement), and the fact that you're not denying any involvement sounds kinda like [[WP:DUCK|&quot;quack quack&quot;]]. That you're bringing up the outing issue before anyone has actually revealed any private information about you does not look good for you. If you just said &quot;no, not involved, just concerned,&quot; that'd be one thing, but you completely duck the issue and try to hide behind [[WP:WIKILAWYERING|rules]]. [[User:Ian.thomson|Ian.thomson]] ([[User talk:Ian.thomson|talk]]) 01:20, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::::I am still waiting for an answer to my direct question. I'll state it again. Are you connected to the product in such a way that you would have a potential conflict of interest? &amp;mdash; [[User:E. Ripley|e. ripley]]\&lt;sup&gt;[[User talk:E. Ripley|talk]]&lt;/sup&gt; 02:41, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::Your response is great: calling me a duck makes everything right. <br /> <br /> ::So lets follow your logic: I followed the rules set by Wikipedia by cleaning an unsourced entry, while ckatz and Johnuniq did not. And because I am asking why the rules are created if they are not going to be followed by them you turn this against me by saying that I hide behind the rules?<br /> <br /> ::Wow. Brilliant logic.<br /> <br /> ::Again, I will quote from the Wikipedia rules that you don't seem to like (and that you don't respect since you have such a low opinion of Wikipedia itself):<br /> <br /> ::&quot;Primacy of basic content policies<br /> <br /> ::All text created in the Wikipedia main namespace is subject to rules covering criteria for articles (what Wikipedia is not); encyclopedic quality (verifiability and original research); editorial approach (neutral point of view); as well as the Wikipedia copyright policy. All editors are expected to stick closely to these policies when creating and evaluating material, and to respect the good faith actions of others who edit content to ensure it complies with these policies.<br /> <br /> ::Who has written the material should be irrelevant so long as these policies are closely adhered to. &quot;<br /> <br /> ::As long as a contribution is neutral and unbiased, there should not be any problem regarding who makes the contribution. And as it happened, the contribution that created this whole thing was my cleaning an unsourced entry, as it is REQUIRED by Wikipedia. <br /> <br /> ::Without conceding anything, lets assume that I do have a connection with the subject. So what? That doesn't erase the fact that ckatz and johnunique did NOT follow the rules set by wikipedia and used a COI accusation as a weapon in the article because they didn't like that I erased that unsourced entry. <br /> <br /> ::There are rules to dealing with a COI in Wikipedia before tagging an article and I did quote them in this space. <br /> <br /> ::So I was trying to uphold Wikipedia rules, while ckatz and Johnuniq did not, and you insult me and tell me that I am somehow wrong?<br /> <br /> ::As I said before: brilliant logic. [[User:Llambert|Llambert]] ([[User talk:Llambert|talk]]) 04:08, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::Yep, you're wrong. We do have guidelines, and you seem to want to pick and choose between them. One thing we don't do is block or ban something that is 'stale'. For instance, we have [[WP:3RR]], which as it says is &quot; a bright-line rule called the &quot;three-revert rule&quot; which is very often applied as a reason for blocks.&quot; But it applies to the last 24 hours, and we don't enforce it for something that is say six hours older than that (and thus hasn't been repeated in the last 24 hours). So no, we would not take any action here even if there had been anything serious to take action about several months ago - that was the appropriate time to complain. <br /> <br /> :::And there's another problem. You talk about &quot;my articles&quot;. You don't have any articles. You may have created them but they aren't yours. See [[WP:OWN]].<br /> <br /> :::Then there's your complaint about unsourced material. When you created the article [[Victor Celerio]], you wrote &quot; Victor Celorio foresaw the advent of what is now known as the internet&quot;. That's still in the article. It isn't sourced. Here [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Victor_Celorio&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=331532271] you added some more unsourced material with citation needed tags. What were you thinking? Adding material and asking others to source it is not the way we are meant to be writing BLPs. The article needs attention as it still has unsourced material - and then there's what looks like an attempt to use patents to show notability, another but more minor issue as Celerio passes our notability criteria.<br /> <br /> :::We are not going to take action on these stale complaints. You've now been asked about COI and are stone-walling. The COI tags shouldn't be removed. [[User:Dougweller|Dougweller]] ([[User talk:Dougweller|talk]]) 05:54, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::::Fresh eyes here - I have just read all this for the first time, and have no connection to anyone here whatsoever. Sure seems to me like the questions about the possible COI are at the heart of the matter. This seems an easy call... Without a direct answer from Llambert, or other new information, I would suggest leaving the tags and closing this thread due to the stonewalling. [[User:Jusdafax|Jusdafax]] 08:03, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::Wow. I obviously touched a nerve here. I am receiving so many false accusations is almost comical. Let me start by the most obvious one.<br /> <br /> :::Stonewalling: I am not stonewalling. Although I am under no obligation to do so, I thought I had already answered the question by saying that you can assume that I have contact with the subject.<br /> <br /> :::I will be glad to answer it to e. ripley more clearly: No, I don't get paid by anyone for editing this. I do not own shares in the company. I am and have been for many years a professor of history in a local college, and that is as much as I am willing to say about myself. Is there a potential COI? Yes, there is. But that is why I have always been extra careful about any edits I've made so as to comply with the Wikipedia rules since I became aware of them. I rarely do any editing directly in those articles except to clean vandalism or wrong entries. Which is what happened in December 2009. I cleaned an entry which was clearly wrong. So why aren't you asking the other guys what was their interest in the matter?<br /> <br /> :::Jusdafax says the the tags are at the heart of the matter, which is what I have been saying all along. Not the tags themselves, but the way they were used by ckatz.<br /> <br /> :::But Dougweller hurries to find me at fault in something and he makes a couple of big mistakes. The first one is the [[WP:3RR]] rule. I didn't claim that a [[WP:3RR]] aplied. My question was about the use of the COI tags as a harassment weapon, which is clearly NOT allowed by the rules. No ifs or buts.<br /> <br /> :::Sorry but no, I don't pick and choose rules. You are the one with the power to do so. Not me. To the best of my abilities I've followed all the indications and the guidelines in Wikipedia regarding these matters. And I've come here to express my disagreement, like I am supposed to do.<br /> <br /> :::The second is perhaps more serious mistake and makes obvious the intent to turn the tables on me by any possible means: Dougweller accuses me of writing the very same unsourced entry that I erased in December 09 for being plain wrong!<br /> <br /> :::WOW!<br /> <br /> :::His third accusation is wrong again: the patent was just another reference. Nothing else and nothing more. The text says InstaBook got patents and I provided the numbers of the patents as a reference. How is that wrong? Please explain it to me because I don't understand what is the big issue there. As a matter of fact somebody else is editing that article right now and asking for (guess what?) the citations for the patents.<br /> <br /> :::Your fourth accusation is correct. I meant to say my entries, not my articles. My apologies.<br /> <br /> :::However as I said before, if my action to clean the article as it is REQUIRED by Wikipedia provoked ckatz reaction with the tags, and I let six months pass by, following Wikipedia advice, how does that make the actions by ckatz less wrong? <br /> <br /> :::You say that you will take no action since I let those six months pass by and the whole thing is &quot;stale&quot;. Fine. I cannot do anything about it. But my actions followed precisely what the Wikipedia guidelines recommend: stop editing, walk away and then come back to ask the questions in these pages. <br /> <br /> :::I don't understand the hostility. You guys are getting all agitated for nothing, because frankly, from the beginning when I wrote to him, I was not asking nor expecting any specific action against ckatz except perhaps an explanation for his actions. <br /> <br /> :::I received none. And now you tell me that you don't care about giving me one either.<br /> <br /> :::That is fine too. <br /> <br /> :::But it seems to me that by trying to make me the guilty party here, and worse, by making it via false accusations and innuendos, you are diminishing the standard that Wikipedia should aim to reach. You are not harming me: you are harming Wikipedia. [[User:Llambert|Llambert]] ([[User talk:Llambert|talk]]) 18:33, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::: So you edited articles you admit you have a [[WP:COI|conflict of interest]] in, then got upset when the articles were tagged with a COI tag six months ago? Again, I'm not sure what you hope to accomplish with this. [[User:Dayewalker|Dayewalker]] ([[User talk:Dayewalker|talk]]) 22:53, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :::::Reading a bit more closely, it appears as if Llambert is saying the problem with the COI tag is not that it was placed, but that it used in some sort of harassing fashion. I'm a little confused about how you can be harassed by someone placing a COI tag, if you admit that you have a conflict of interest. Am I missing something? I'm not agitated or hostile, mostly just confused. Llambert, one of the things you should understand about the culture here is that many people who edit Wikipedia have a very strong, sometimes knee-jerk antipathy toward those who edit Wikipedia in order to further some business interest. That aside, when you have a conflict of interest, your edits on that subject are always going to receive more scrutiny than other edits might because your motives are automatically in question. That's why the policy recommends that you simply not edit articles on subjects about which you have a conflict of interest. Instead, you should propose changes on the talk page and allow non-involved editors to evaluate them for their appropriateness. I'm sorry if you feel that you have been treated poorly. Wikipedia's processes are rarely intended to be punitive and particularly do not contemplate punishing someone for minor infractions that occurred half a year ago or more (though, I make no judgment about what was or wasn't improper since I haven't evaluated it myself). Given that, what would you like to happen here? &amp;mdash; [[User:E. Ripley|e. ripley]]\&lt;sup&gt;[[User talk:E. Ripley|talk]]&lt;/sup&gt; 15:43, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::::: Thank you, E. Ripley, for reading more carefully what I wrote. I am sorry I didn't do it more clearly. Yes, I am complaining about the way the tags were placed. In other words, the abuse, not the use. <br /> ::::::In answering to your earlier question, I said that there is a &quot;potential&quot; COI. But potential is not the same as existing. As I understand it by reading Wikipedia guidelines, and is clear by any analysis, it only becomes a COI the moment I write something which is not factual, either positive or negative. According to Wikipedia, even the subjects themselves can correct their own pages as long as they remain neutral.<br /> ::::::My objection was, as I said before, that those tags were used as a response to a clean up I did, when somebody was placing wrong and defamatory information on those pages (the same wrong information Dougweller found objectionable and accused me of writing). And Wikipedia indicates that such information needs to be removed, no ifs or buts.<br /> ::::::Wikipedia has a guideline about those tags. If I placed any information that could be read as a COI, I would expect the other editor to follow the established procedure. <br /> ::::::But instead of that, those tags were slapped as a response to my clean up, and then some other entries I made someplace else were deleted, using those tags as an excuse in a circular way: I get accused in one place, and then I get dammed and convicted in another using that COI accusation as proof. That is when it became harassment from my point of view. Even here, the tag carries such a weight that I got slammed for asking questions about it even though an actual COI does NOT exist.<br /> ::::::I wrote a polite message to the other editor and asked why was he doing that and he ignored me. Instead of entering into an editing war I waited as suggested by Wikipedia and then I placed my question in these pages and I got angry responses in return.<br /> ::::::To answer your question: what I would like to see happening is for that editor(s) to be reminded that there are procedures that need to be followed for the common good of Wikipedia, that tags are not to be used as a weapon because the only one that is damaged is Wikipedia itself, not the editors. <br /> :::::: As I said several times, the only thing I did was some required cleaning following the rules. If those tags need to remain in place, then so be it. If not, then they should be removed, because they were not there before my clean up. [[User:Llambert|Llambert]] ([[User talk:Llambert|talk]]) 19:56, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == [[User:Pmanderson]] ==<br /> <br /> [[User:Pmanderson]]s first &quot;interaction&quot; with me was him making a massive revert of things both me an others did, after discussion on the talk page, calling it &quot;Vandalism&quot;, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;action=historysubmit&amp;diff=368433033&amp;oldid=367650849], implying that all those behind the consensus including me was vandals. He continues to call me a vandal [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AList_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;action=historysubmit&amp;diff=370604402&amp;oldid=370535477], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;diff=next&amp;oldid=370605350], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AList_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;action=historysubmit&amp;diff=369946605&amp;oldid=369944453], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AList_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;action=historysubmit&amp;diff=369340961&amp;oldid=369340534], while generally refusing to engage in constructive debate. Lastly he calls me a liar, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AList_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;action=historysubmit&amp;diff=372608491&amp;oldid=371983720] and a POV-pusher, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;diff=next&amp;oldid=372628957], because I want his sources to support his edits, and don't want [[WP:OR]] or [[WP:SYN]] in the article.<br /> <br /> When he doesn't engage in direct attacks, he is rude and claims that I have &quot;pet definitions&quot; or particular political views and that I edit based on POV, and not on wikipedia policies. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AList_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;action=historysubmit&amp;diff=372634734&amp;oldid=372633811]<br /> <br /> I have tried to be patient, but my patience with his attacks and rudeness and general refusal to engage in serious debate (it's possible, but only after repeating my criticism several times, he will ignore it the first few times), and this situation is not just not acceptable any more.<br /> <br /> He also ignores/brushes off any warnings with &quot;keep off my talk page&quot;. So I can't warn him the normal way any more, hence this WQA. --[[User:OpenFuture|OpenFuture]] ([[User talk:OpenFuture|talk]]) 20:14, 9 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::Planting template after template on Pma's talkpage is far from &quot;the normal way&quot;, OpenFuture. Please see my post [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:OpenFuture&amp;oldid=372637904#Please_stop here]. [[User:Bishonen|Bishonen]] | [[User talk:Bishonen|talk]] 20:56, 9 July 2010 (UTC).<br /> :::&quot;Template after template&quot;? Pmanderson has broken Wikipedia policies, and I have warned him. Is that not how you are supposed to do it? Did I misunderstand something? --[[User:OpenFuture|OpenFuture]] ([[User talk:OpenFuture|talk]]) 21:02, 9 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::::Bishonen has on my talk page made some suggestions, mainly I should have brought Pmandersons personal attacks up much quicker instead of warning him. One warning should be enough apparently. I will heed his recommendations in the future. But it doens't change the fact that Pmanderson has repeatedly insulted me, and refuses to stop with the insults, making it very hard to conduct a constructive debate. --[[User:OpenFuture|OpenFuture]] ([[User talk:OpenFuture|talk]]) 12:22, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :The complaint of a foiled revert-warrior, who, having blanked most of [[List of wars between democracies]], and spent several days revert-warring against sourced restorations ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;diff=368823209&amp;oldid=368798159 16:43 18 June], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=368830335 17:21], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;diff=next&amp;oldid=368831694 17:43], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;diff=next&amp;oldid=369223451 21 June 04:13], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;diff=next&amp;oldid=369324794 09:14], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;diff=next&amp;oldid=369329083 10:18], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;diff=369760951&amp;oldid=369754268 23 June 16:23], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;diff=369875945&amp;oldid=369844624 24 June 07:42], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;diff=370364176&amp;oldid=370316014 27 June 05:42], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;diff=370535013&amp;oldid=370459586 28 June 04:23], etc., etc.) is now attempting any means to gain sympathy for his actions. <br /> <br /> :He has now found or made up a definition of democracy of his very own, and insists that a paper by the founder of [[democratic peace theory]] is not talking about democracies when it discusses &quot;elective governments&quot; with secret ballots and civil liberties. Reliable sources disagree with the point of view he is pushing (cited on the talk page), and he now comes here to wail over this content dispute. [[User:Pmanderson|Septentrionalis]] &lt;small&gt;[[User talk:Pmanderson|PMAnderson]]&lt;/small&gt; 20:29, 9 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::As we see, the claims that I have bad faith, and calling me revert-warrior etc continues. I have reverted some of his changes, yes, but always with explanations and accompanying discussion on talk page. There was been no revert-warring from my side. Many reverts has been because his sources do *not* support his edits, and he has afterwards come up with other sources (which are not available online, so I have not had time to find them and check them yet). As soon as I have not been able to verify the sources, I have let the edit stay. --[[User:OpenFuture|OpenFuture]] ([[User talk:OpenFuture|talk]]) 20:45, 9 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> And another one: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AReliable_sources%2FNoticeboard&amp;action=historysubmit&amp;diff=373082574&amp;oldid=373082381] (and as a followup [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard&amp;curid=11424955&amp;diff=373092787&amp;oldid=373092291]). He is not likely to stop. --[[User:OpenFuture|OpenFuture]] ([[User talk:OpenFuture|talk]]) 15:11, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Not targeting me this time at least, but still awfully rude: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=373267484]. --[[User:OpenFuture|OpenFuture]] ([[User talk:OpenFuture|talk]]) 15:03, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> And [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard&amp;curid=11424955&amp;diff=373273807&amp;oldid=373273281]. He really isn't going to stop. --[[User:OpenFuture|OpenFuture]] ([[User talk:OpenFuture|talk]]) 15:39, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Again: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_wars_between_democracies&amp;curid=6153139&amp;diff=373498963&amp;oldid=373491728] I'm giving up on getting any sort of response here. What is next? How do I raise this issue, I'm tired of getting insulted every day, it's a hinder to constructive debate. --[[User:OpenFuture|OpenFuture]] ([[User talk:OpenFuture|talk]]) 20:22, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :I recommend you bring it to [[wp:ani]] to be honest, bugger all can be done here [[User:Marknutley|mark nutley]] ([[User talk:Marknutley|talk]]) 20:50, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::OK, will do. --[[User:OpenFuture|OpenFuture]] ([[User talk:OpenFuture|talk]]) 20:58, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Biased editor ==<br /> <br /> {{NWQA|1=Already heavily admonished at [[WP:ANI]] and rightfully so ([[User talk:Bwilkins|&lt;font style=&quot;font-variant:small-caps&quot;&gt;talk→&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;span style=&quot;border:1px solid black;&quot;&gt;'''&amp;nbsp;[[User:Bwilkins|BWilkins]]&amp;nbsp;'''&lt;/span&gt;[[Special:Contributions/Bwilkins|&lt;font style=&quot;font-variant:small-caps&quot;&gt;←track&lt;/font&gt;]]) 12:13, 10 July 2010 (UTC)}}<br /> [[User:Bender176]] is biased against anonymous editors and will revert them regardless of the merits of the edits. He also insults editors. He labels anyone who disagrees with him or her as 'vandals'. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Bender176 his or her edits for the whole history]. [[Special:Contributions/129.120.176.206|129.120.176.206]] ([[User talk:129.120.176.206|talk]]) 01:14, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :False all the way around ladies and gentlemen please check my other contributions. I may make some mistakes but I cleaned my act up since then. People may disagree with me but that doesn't mean they're wrong. He's trying to [[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bender176&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=372670555| hound me]] because I reverted a few of his edits mistakenly [[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=BART_Police_shooting_of_Oscar_Grant&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=372669285| here]] and it's not because he's an anon either, I revert vandalism from [[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=GEICO_advertising_campaigns&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=372668626| registered editors]] as well. I even agreed to bury the hatchet but he disagreed. --[[User:Bender176|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;'''Bender176'''&lt;/font&gt;]] [[User talk:Bender176|&lt;sub&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;maroon&quot;&gt;'''Talk to me'''&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/sub&gt;]] 01:21, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::''you are anonymous and therefore you don't count'' You could at least say &quot;I'm sorry for saying that&quot;. [[Special:Contributions/129.120.176.206|129.120.176.206]] ([[User talk:129.120.176.206|talk]]) 01:23, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :::I did by saying &quot;[[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:129.120.176.206&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=372670720| let's bury the hatchet]]&quot; but YOU [[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:129.120.176.206&amp;diff=next&amp;oldid=372670770| refused to]], and I only meant that on my talk page because you have no right to edit war on it but on articles everyone has equal say. --[[User:Bender176|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;'''Bender176'''&lt;/font&gt;]] [[User talk:Bender176|&lt;sub&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;maroon&quot;&gt;'''Talk to me'''&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/sub&gt;]] 01:26, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::::New stuff goes at the bottom. [[User:Ian.thomson|Ian.thomson]] ([[User talk:Ian.thomson|talk]]) 01:59, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::::OK, looking through, I saw [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Superman_Returns&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=372669799 this]. Bender, that's not [[WP:VAN|vandalism]] (he's trying to '''help'''), that's unsourced [[WP:OR|commentary]]. I recommend looking at [[Wikipedia:Template_messages/User_talk_namespace]] some more. It's honestly a bit rude to lump all edit that aren't perfect together as vandalism. You should have gone with &lt;nowiki&gt;{{subst:uw-unsourced1|Superman Returns|subst=subst:}} ~~~~&lt;/nowiki&gt;, (same for [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=BART_Police_shooting_of_Oscar_Grant&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=372669285 this]), which would have left a message asking him to use sources in the future. You need to cool it with the vandalism warnings until [[WP:NOTIMPORTANT|you don't get so pissy about them]] and until you understand what actually does constitute vandalism. [[WP:BITE|Behavior like you've had towards 129.120.176.206]] was why you got blocked before.<br /> ::::129.120.176.206, please check out [[WP:CITE]], [[WP:RS]], and [[WP:OR]]. Your edit to Superman Returns was not vandalism, but it does not meet the standards for [[WP:RS|sourcing]], and I would have reverted it had I seen it. [[User:Ian.thomson|Ian.thomson]] ([[User talk:Ian.thomson|talk]]) 02:15, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :::::For the record, user has been indef'd [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&amp;action=view&amp;type=block&amp;page=User:Bender176]. [[User:Swarm|&lt;span style='color:black'&gt;&lt;b&gt;Swarm&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;sup&gt;[[User talk:Swarm|&lt;span style=&quot;color:blue;&quot;&gt;'''Talk'''&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; 02:00, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Walter Görlitz ==<br /> <br /> I am loathe to bring a matter here; I almost never do. However, {{user|Walter Görlitz}} is an editor who's found his way to the block of articles I normally edit and there has been some quite intense friction. He's fairly consistently [[WP:EW|edit warred]] and subsequently made on talk pages numerous [[WP:NPA|personal attacks]] and [[WP:AGF|assumptions of bad faith]], hasn't heeded my requests to cease such behaviour, and seems like he'll be active on the pages I'm at for some time. Hence, I'd like some assistance - either another voice or other voices he might listen to, some guidance, and/or general advice - in getting the atmosphere more collegial, for everyone.<br /> <br /> A sample of what I'm talking about follows:<br /> * Questioning my grasp of English:<br /> ** &quot;English comprehension as well?&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Micha%C3%ABlle_Jean&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=372701673]<br /> ** &quot;Don't place tags until you learn the Queen's English&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Walter_G%C3%B6rlitz&amp;diff=372692622&amp;oldid=372690291]<br /> ** &quot;English much?&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Micha%C3%ABlle_Jean&amp;diff=372689004&amp;oldid=372688155] <br /> * Accusations of bad faith:<br /> ** &quot;you have shown bad faith in this date format thing in the past&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Miesianiacal&amp;diff=372444744&amp;oldid=372439868]<br /> ** &quot;You came off looking badly in both cases... I'm saying that you don't operate in good faith. I have no need to control date formats: that seems to be your domain considering your history.... Seeing as how little you respect consensus, I doubt that discussing this will matter.&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Miesianiacal&amp;diff=372447687&amp;oldid=372446289]<br /> ** &quot;You edited in bad faith...&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Miesianiacal&amp;diff=372464476&amp;oldid=372463119]<br /> ** &quot;In total, your argument... is a lie based upon your lack of good faith editing and your blatant disregard for the rules you are clinging to.&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Victoria_Day&amp;diff=364521927&amp;oldid=364520561] With the added edit summary, &quot;red herring season.&quot;<br /> ** &quot;Reverted 2 edits by Miesianiacal identified as vandalism to last revision by Walter Görlitz&quot; [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Victoria_Day&amp;diff=357283177&amp;oldid=357281916] (A false accusation)<br /> ** &quot;Reverted 2 edits by Miesianiacal identified as vandalism to last revision by Walter Görlitz&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=David_Lloyd_Johnston&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=372447701] (A false accusation)<br /> ** &quot;I would prefer [[User talk:Miesianiacal]] to simply admit to making the changes and revert them...&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:David_Lloyd_Johnston&amp;diff=372449691&amp;oldid=372448820] (I hadn't made all the changes)<br /> ** &quot;The distinguishing &quot;that country's&quot; was edit-wared by [[User:Miesianiacal]]&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Micha%C3%ABlle_Jean&amp;diff=372689004&amp;oldid=372688155](I reverted once)<br /> ** &quot;Feel free to continue to obfuscate.&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Miesianiacal&amp;diff=372450292&amp;oldid=372448495]<br /> ** &quot;I'll wait for Miesianiacal to tell me that he's ignoring consensus before I escalate.&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Victoria_Day&amp;diff=365493643&amp;oldid=365492342]<br /> ** &quot;How about you stop showing [[WP:Ownership]]?&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Micha%C3%ABlle_Jean&amp;diff=372704427&amp;oldid=372703734] (After I'd agreed to a [[WP:3O|third opinion]] I'd sought)<br /> ** &quot;That was gracious losing. You thought you were right and made an appeal hoping to be vindicated. When it turns out that you were wrong you actually argued with those called to help you. YOu finally gave in when you realized you could not persuade them that your previous wording wasn't ideal.&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Micha%C3%ABlle_Jean&amp;diff=372739505&amp;oldid=372711944] (About my seeking of dispute resolution and subsequent (and immediate) acceptance of the compromise)<br /> * A bit of both:<br /> ** &quot;[[User talk:Miesianiacal]] is mistaken at best or at worst lying or incapable of reading.&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Victoria_Day&amp;diff=364232539&amp;oldid=364190872]<br /> * Policing my talk page comments:<br /> ** &quot;Removing prejudice and incorrect commentary&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Victoria_Day&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=364333021]<br /> ** &quot;Inserting your opinion on a talk page to bias the discussion with false information is not a benefit. Don't do it again. I decided not to warn you and merely reverted your attempt to influence editors with your typical misrepresentation. I will be forced to warn you the same way you warned me.&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Miesianiacal&amp;diff=364334889&amp;oldid=364290764]<br /> * General rudeness:<br /> ** &quot;I think 'that country's confederation' is the stupid wording...&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Micha%C3%ABlle_Jean&amp;diff=372703185&amp;oldid=372702336]<br /> ** &quot;Nice hyperbole.&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Miesianiacal&amp;diff=362704286&amp;oldid=362703824]<br /> ** &quot;I wasn't being rude, you are being arrogant though&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Miesianiacal&amp;diff=362704647&amp;oldid=362704286]<br /> ** &quot;Sorry if it offends you to try to make sense.&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Miesianiacal&amp;diff=362752846&amp;oldid=362752457]<br /> ** &quot;Miesianiacal has a Messiah complex&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Victoria_Day&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=364335270]<br /> ** &quot;You really are insipid.&quot;[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Miesianiacal&amp;diff=364335627&amp;oldid=364334889]<br /> <br /> Some of the more offensive comments left at my talk page I deleted, but for context and more detail, the following discussions generally illustrate the interactions between Walter Görlitz and myself:<br /> * [[Talk:Victoria Day#For the record]]<br /> * [[Talk:Victoria Day#Long date format]]<br /> * [[Talk:Prime Minister of Canada#Talk:Prime Minister of Canada#Seeking consensus to remove .3Csmall.3E tags around .3Cref.3E]]<br /> * [[Talk:David Lloyd Johnston#Date format]]<br /> * [[Talk:Michaëlle Jean#Confederation of...?]]<br /> * [[User talk:Miesianiacal#Victoria Day x2]]<br /> * [[User talk:Miesianiacal#Counting and WP:3RR]]<br /> * [[User talk:Miesianiacal#GG date formats]]<br /> <br /> It may also be pertinent to check the history of his talk page; he's had some civility warnings in the past (eg. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Walter_G%C3%B6rlitz&amp;diff=371887302&amp;oldid=371827362]), but he deleted them.<br /> <br /> I understand that I am not free of blame for some bad attitude myself, here; in compiling this report, I've come to notice my tendency to be a little too sensitive and beget snippiness with more snippiness. I will try harder to control that. However, it's still my impression that the scales of misbehaviour are tipped towards WG's side (no bias, of course! ;) ). Other input - on WG, myself, or both together - would be appreciated. --&lt;span style=&quot;border-top:1px solid black;font-size:80%&quot;&gt;[[User talk:Miesianiacal|&lt;span style=&quot;background-color:black;color:white&quot;&gt;'''Ħ'''&lt;/span&gt;]] [[User:Miesianiacal|&lt;span style=&quot;color:black&quot;&gt;MIESIANIACAL&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;/span&gt; 15:52, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> : I am not going to argue against this record nor have I read it. [[User: Miesianiacal]]'s ability to record every offence made against him is well recognized. --[[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 17:04, 10 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::Sounds like you two need a divorce. -- [[User:OlEnglish|&lt;font size=&quot;5&quot;&gt;&amp;oelig;&lt;/font&gt;]][[User talk:OlEnglish|&lt;sup&gt;&amp;trade;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 09:13, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :::Agree. And this forum may be the wrong place for that. [[User:Jusdafax|Jusdafax]] 11:07, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::::Not sure what the desired result is: it's not really specified. A possible interaction ban? This is a detailed report, and needs further clarification... [[User:Doc9871|Doc9871]] ([[User talk:Doc9871|talk]]) 11:43, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :::::From my reading of the instructions at the head of this page, I was under the impression that this forum didn't offer much in the way of action; it was more just a place to analyse situations and explore some options. I don't necessarily want to see WG pushed off; he can be productive and sometimes civil. I guess I'd first just like a confirmation that his behaviour has indeed been contrary to Wikipedia's civility guidelines and, if so, have him hear more voices reminding him to keep it respectful and see what results from that. --&lt;span style=&quot;border-top:1px solid black;font-size:80%&quot;&gt;[[User talk:Miesianiacal|&lt;span style=&quot;background-color:black;color:white&quot;&gt;'''Ħ'''&lt;/span&gt;]] [[User:Miesianiacal|&lt;span style=&quot;color:black&quot;&gt;MIESIANIACAL&lt;/span&gt;]]&lt;/span&gt; 15:13, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> : Actually I will comment. The &quot;civility warning&quot; was more of a comment made by an editor who took my comment to a third editor, on that third editor's talk page, in the wrong light. The third editor on whose talk page I posted a comment had restored a section to an article with a comment that made it obvious that he missed a discussion on the talk page about removing some content. He was also in an edit war earlier in the day and I was trying to inquire if he was having a bad day. After receiving the &quot;warning&quot; I immediately went back to the third editor and apologized. He then came back and said that he took not offence. And contrary to M's accusation that I deleted &quot;them&quot; (a single warning treated as a plural?) is incorrect as the full discussion is on my talk page and has been there since the issue ended five days ago. I may have received earlier notices or comments and they're in my archives, although I may have removed them after responding. --[[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 22:02, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::So how do you foresee ending this matter? -- [[User:OlEnglish|&lt;font size=&quot;5&quot;&gt;&amp;oelig;&lt;/font&gt;]][[User talk:OlEnglish|&lt;sup&gt;&amp;trade;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 01:48, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == User:Ivyleaguer ==<br /> <br /> Someone needs to have a word with [[User:Ivyleaguer]] as their rudeness and general hostility needs to be checked ASAP. I'm on a Wiki-break at the moment (preventing me from logging in), but I popped in to find this [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3APinkadelica&amp;action=historysubmit&amp;diff=372732445&amp;oldid=372602650 lovely ditty] on my talk page. Basically this started when IvyLeaguer accused me of [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Pinkadelica&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=371304597 spamming their talk page] because I placed a templated warning on the user's talk page for [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tevin_Campbell&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=370586622 adding content] that was not supported by the source given on the [[Tevin Campbell]] article. I was prepared to let that go as the user doesn't appear to edit much and might not understand that talk pages are for editors to communicate with each other, but they re-added the content back to the article a second time with [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tevin_Campbell&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=371306452 two very poor sources] (a blog and Foxytunes which I believe is a music site). Naturally, that didn't go down well and they left yet another message talking about [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Pinkadelica&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=371702565 some kind of nonsense] that I didn't bother reading as I tend to zone out when people who don't know me accuse me of bias and homophobia for removing unsourced content from a BLP. My final message to the user was [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AIvyleaguer&amp;action=historysubmit&amp;diff=371738165&amp;oldid=371307857 rather blunt], but I don't think the responses I've been getting from this sporadic user are warranted in any way (especially since they finally got around to adding a seemingly reliable source and there's no edit war going on). Since the editor doesn't seem to grace us with their presence on a daily basis, I highly doubt their involvement in this thread will happen, but I believe their behavior needs to be dealt with regardless. [[Special:Contributions/70.242.12.110|70.242.12.110]] ([[User talk:70.242.12.110|talk]]) 04:15, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :I've issued a standard warning about personal attacks. Let's see if he joins this discussion. [[User:Netalarm|&lt;font color=&quot;#00AA11&quot;&gt;'''Netalarm'''&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;sup&gt;[[User talk:Netalarm|&lt;font color=&quot;#FF9933&quot;&gt;'''talk'''&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; 17:51, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::Thank you. As I stated previously, I doubt they will participate as they edit sporadically and don't appear to be familiar with Wikipedia process. [[Special:Contributions/70.241.20.100|70.241.20.100]] ([[User talk:70.241.20.100|talk]]) 19:25, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == User:BigK_HeX ==<br /> {{hat | Closed as not actionable}}<br /> This is a contentious page and the debate tends to get heated. [[User:BigK_HeX]] has made a feel an unwarranted [[wp:pa]] on another editor [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mass_killings_under_Communist_regimes&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=373276976] accusing an editor of being condescending and annoying. I asked him to redact the remarks [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mass_killings_under_Communist_regimes&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=373277411] and he has pointedly refused [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mass_killings_under_Communist_regimes&amp;diff=prev&amp;oldid=373279441]. I have never actually posted one of these before and am unsure of the correct procedure so am unsure what else to supply [[User:Marknutley|mark nutley]] ([[User talk:Marknutley|talk]]) 16:21, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> : This is the correct procedure. [[User:BigK HeX|BigK HeX]] ([[User talk:BigK HeX|talk]]) 16:33, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> : At this time, my only reply is about the claim that my comment is &quot;unwarranted.&quot; Pretty obviously, I'm not the only editor on that talk page who tire of the snipes of the type that prompted my response. [[User:BigK HeX|BigK HeX]] ([[User talk:BigK HeX|talk]]) 16:35, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::Although I wish editors were held to account for these sorts of comments, &quot;personal attack&quot; on Wikipedia is generally taken to refer to more serious name calling, religious or ethnic slurs, etc. Under current interpretation, there would be no call for this editor to redact these comments. [[User:Yworo|Yworo]] ([[User talk:Yworo|talk]]) 16:37, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :::Frankly the discussion at [[Talk:Mass killings under Communist regimes]] is just getting absurd, with a very clear wedge dividing the arguments into two groups in such a way that the issue is unlikely to be resolved until everyone just gets fed up of arguing about it. This is just the content dispute spilling over into over-sensitive complaints where conduct on both sides of the argument has been less than ideal. BigK's comment was an opinion, not a personal attack. It wasn't exactly constructive or relevant to the discussion, but what exactly do you expect us to do about a user expressing annoyance at the tone of another user's comments? &lt;span id=&quot;sig&quot; style=&quot;background:#FFFFC0&quot;&gt;'''[[User:Giftiger_wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Verdana&quot; color=&quot;#900000&quot;&gt;Giftiger&lt;font color=&quot;#FF0000&quot;&gt;Wunsch&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;]]''' [[User_talk:Giftiger wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Tahoma&quot; color=&quot;#0060A0&quot;&gt;[TALK]&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/span&gt; 17:32, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::::I would expect people to remind him of [[wp:civil]] but if this is the wrong board mark it as resolved. Were should i report people who are insinuating i am a sockpuppet btw? [[User:Marknutley|mark nutley]] ([[User talk:Marknutley|talk]]) 17:38, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :::::Sigh... you're going to need to develop thicker skin if you plan to continue to collaborate, Mark. If someone is accusing you of being a sock of another user, just tell them to file a [[WP:SPI]] if they think they can justify it. Many of your own comments in the discussion at [[Talk:Mass killings under Communist regimes]] have been no more civil than BigK's comment about condescension, so I would ask you to take your own advice rather than complaining about minor comments by other users, especially when they're not even directed at you. &lt;span id=&quot;sig&quot; style=&quot;background:#FFFFC0&quot;&gt;'''[[User:Giftiger_wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Verdana&quot; color=&quot;#900000&quot;&gt;Giftiger&lt;font color=&quot;#FF0000&quot;&gt;Wunsch&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;]]''' [[User_talk:Giftiger wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Tahoma&quot; color=&quot;#0060A0&quot;&gt;[TALK]&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/span&gt; 17:42, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :::::Fair enough, but i do not like being called a sock, i was accused of that when i first got to WP for no reason at all and am a bit touchy about it, thicker skin coming up [[User:Marknutley|mark nutley]] ([[User talk:Marknutley|talk]]) 17:47, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::::::It's happened to me and it's not very pleasant, but in the end they can rant about you being a sock all they like, but if they don't file an SPI they're essentially admitting the accusation's unfounded. &lt;span id=&quot;sig&quot; style=&quot;background:#FFFFC0&quot;&gt;'''[[User:Giftiger_wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Verdana&quot; color=&quot;#900000&quot;&gt;Giftiger&lt;font color=&quot;#FF0000&quot;&gt;Wunsch&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;]]''' [[User_talk:Giftiger wunsch|&lt;font face=&quot;Tahoma&quot; color=&quot;#0060A0&quot;&gt;[TALK]&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/span&gt; 17:49, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :::::::BigK HeX said OpenFuture was being condescending, which is annoying. At the worst, he said OpenFuture was being condescending. I think we can all agree that real condescension is annoying. It's not a personal attack, maybe a little bit [[WP:CIV|uncivil]], but pretty borderline at that if this is the most you can produce (and, who knows, maybe he was being condescending -- I have no idea what else OpenFuture has said). I would personally prefer to see everybody just take a deep breath and try not to comment on contributors. Move along, shake hands, try to play nice together. &amp;mdash; [[User:E. Ripley|e. ripley]]\&lt;sup&gt;[[User talk:E. Ripley|talk]]&lt;/sup&gt; 18:10, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> *'''Comment''' I recently filed a WQA against OpenFuture, the editor mark nutley says has been attacked.[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts/archive88#User:OpenFuture] Among the numerous comments of his I listed were<br /> ::&quot;And you are also repeating everything both here and on my talk page, which is unnecessary and annoying&quot;.<br /> ::&quot;Your constant attempts of inventing your own Wikipedia policies are getting a bit annoying, to be honest&quot;.<br /> :His response was, &quot;The quotes are all self-explanatory, and in all cases completely correct.... I repeat: There is nothing for me to explain. It is obvious, even out of context, that most quotes above does not represent any abuse.&quot; Since OpenFuture does not consider this type of conversation to be a personal attack or something that should be brought up here, neither should mark nutley. [[User:The Four Deuces|TFD]] ([[User talk:The Four Deuces|talk]]) 18:06, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::Stop dragging me into everything, please. And try to understand the difference between saying &quot;Please stop doing X, it's annoying&quot; and &quot;You are an annoying person&quot;. --[[User:OpenFuture|OpenFuture]] ([[User talk:OpenFuture|talk]]) 21:51, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :::Actually mark nutley dragged you into this by bringing up a comment made about you. My point is that you would not feel the comments were a personal attack because they are the types of comments you have stated you consider to be acceptable. You should ask mark nutley to close this discussion thread. [[User:The Four Deuces|TFD]] ([[User talk:The Four Deuces|talk]]) 22:03, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::::No, he did not drag me into it. My behavior is not the topic here, and even less are your opinions about that behavior relevant. Stop your vendetta, and stop dragging me into everything, and stop trying to make each debate you enter off topic. <br /> ::::Big Ks comment was uncivil, but making a WQA is completely unjustified, a warning on his talk page should have been enough. But it's up to Mark if he wants to close the WQA, not me. I have nothing to do with this besides being the target of BigK's mild uncivility. --[[User:OpenFuture|OpenFuture]] ([[User talk:OpenFuture|talk]]) 19:49, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> {{hab}}<br /> == Eva Grossjean ==<br /> <br /> {{user|Eva Grossjean}} Continued incivility past final warning. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;action=history Revision history of Catalonia] for most of the belittling edit summaries, although some anti-IP biases (and the worst of the insults) are on the user's talk page. [[Special:Contributions/69.181.249.92|69.181.249.92]] ([[User talk:69.181.249.92|talk]]) 21:06, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :I understand that doing the &lt;nowiki&gt;{{user|Username template thingy}}&lt;/nowiki&gt; ''in the thread title'' messes with some people's browsers, so I fixed it for you. {{unsigned|Ian.thomson}}<br /> <br /> :I think the &quot;final warning&quot; was a bit premature, but this new editor does need to be stopped from being abusive towards other editors. [[User:Boing! said Zebedee|Boing! said Zebedee]] ([[User talk:Boing! said Zebedee|talk]]) 21:36, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::I'm leaving a handwritten note basically explaining that civility, not English, is a standard of &quot;fitness&quot; around here. [[User:Ian.thomson|Ian.thomson]] ([[User talk:Ian.thomson|talk]]) 21:40, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :::Looks perfect, thanks -- [[User:Boing! said Zebedee|Boing! said Zebedee]] ([[User talk:Boing! said Zebedee|talk]]) 22:07, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :I want to report that Eva Grossjean has returned to act inappropriately in the discussion page of Catalonia, as can be seen in the link ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Catalonia#Catalonia_is_not_a_nation_.28at_least_legally.29_but_a_historical_nationality.]), maintaining an attitude arrogant and condescending and insulting me several times. [[User:Arkarull|Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]]) 00:16, 15 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == User:Whisky drinker ==<br /> {{resolved|A clear accident, apology has been made by HJ on his talk page, and Xeno added a note to the page history to make it clear the warning was an error. --'''[[User:Taelus|&lt;font color=&quot;#007FAA&quot;&gt;Taelus&lt;/font&gt;]]''' ([[User talk:Taelus|&lt;font color=&quot;#AA22CC&quot;&gt;'''Talk'''&lt;/font&gt;]]) 21:11, 14 July 2010 (UTC)}}<br /> <br /> [[User:Whisky drinker]] placed a a &quot;Level 3 warning re. vandalism&quot; on [[User talk:Fages]], which is my own talk page. He was warning me to not edit my own talk page. He also reverted and then restored the &quot;smiley&quot; that I add to my own talk page. See Diff [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AFages&amp;action=historysubmit&amp;diff=373470651&amp;oldid=373470593]. I want to have the edit summary warning removed from my edit history. I am not able to contact [[User:Whisky drinker]] because his talk page is protected and I am not able to leave messages there. [[User:Fages|Fages]] ([[User talk:Fages|talk]]) 17:30, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :Whiskey Drinker I believe is an alternative account for [[User:HJ Mitchell]]. I've let him know this is here.--[[User:Cube lurker|Cube lurker]] ([[User talk:Cube lurker|talk]]) 17:50, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::As a cursory examination of your talk page's history will show you, I reverted my own edit '''''9 seconds''''' after making it. Also, if you'd visited either Whisky drinker's talk or userpages, you would have noticed the big, bold, red notice asking you to post to my talk page or note a bad revert on the relevant page. So far you've been to RFUP and WQA but not my talk page. What are you trying to achieve? [[User:HJ Mitchell|&lt;font color=&quot;Teal&quot; face=&quot;Tahoma&quot;&gt;'''HJ&amp;nbsp;Mitchell'''&lt;/font&gt;]] &amp;#124; [[User talk:HJ Mitchell|&lt;font color=&quot;Navy&quot; face= &quot;Times New Roman&quot;&gt;Penny for your thoughts? &lt;/font&gt;]] 17:56, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :::Wow, this is the second day he's been here. Maybe a little more [[WP:AGF]] and a little less [[WP:BITE]].--[[User:Cube lurker|Cube lurker]] ([[User talk:Cube lurker|talk]]) 18:00, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :::An apology with an edit summary clarifying the warning was a mistake would have been more appropriate than a simple revert HJ, after all a new user is likely to be bewildered with a warning message regardless of whether it goes away or not, especially as the scary &quot;warning&quot; message in the edit summary looks rather permanant to them when they view their page history. Not a huge issue mind, but a little apology and a friendly follow-up message to help the user out could go a long way. (For other observers, do note that the reason this ended up at WQA was due to a fully protected talk page that HJ was not aware of, so confusion all around it seems.) --'''[[User:Taelus|&lt;font color=&quot;#007FAA&quot;&gt;Taelus&lt;/font&gt;]]''' ([[User talk:Taelus|&lt;font color=&quot;#AA22CC&quot;&gt;'''Talk'''&lt;/font&gt;]]) 20:03, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> ::::Marked as resolved per description, a mistake which has been corrected, and an apology given. :) --'''[[User:Taelus|&lt;font color=&quot;#007FAA&quot;&gt;Taelus&lt;/font&gt;]]''' ([[User talk:Taelus|&lt;font color=&quot;#AA22CC&quot;&gt;'''Talk'''&lt;/font&gt;]]) 21:11, 14 July 2010 (UTC)</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Catalonia&diff=373517853 2010-07-14T21:56:31Z

<p>Arkarull: /* Catalonia is not a nation (at least legally) but a historical nationality. */</p> <hr /> <div>{{Skip to talk}}<br /> {{Talk header|search=yes}}<br /> {{Off topic warning}}<br /> {{Controversial3}}<br /> {{WikiProject Spain|class=c|importance=top}}<br /> {{WikiProject Catalan-speaker|class=c|importance=top}}<br /> {{OnThisDay|date1=2004-09-11|oldid1=9955831}}<br /> {{auto archiving notice|bot=MiszaBot|age=30|dounreplied=yes}}<br /> {{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn<br /> |target=Talk:Catalonia/Archive index<br /> |mask=Talk:Catalonia/Archive &lt;#&gt;<br /> |leading_zeros=0<br /> |indexhere=yes}}<br /> {{User:MiszaBot/config<br /> |archiveheader = {{aan}}<br /> |maxarchivesize = 200K<br /> |counter = 5<br /> |minthreadsleft = 10<br /> |minthreadstoarchive = 1<br /> |algo = old(30d)<br /> |archive = Talk:Catalonia/Archive %(counter)d<br /> }}<br /> <br /> == Catalonia definition must me corrected ==<br /> <br /> We must differentiate between geographic and politics definition.<br /> Catalonia is a geographical area comprising actual Catalan Community in Spain and Cerdanya which actually is the french department of Pyrinèes Oriental. If there is any reference to Catalonia as a nation, it must cover all Catalonia and not merely the Catalan Community of Spain.<br /> Both populations consider theirselves Catalans sharing the same Catalan language, (even it is not considered an official language in France because political assumptions) whith respect for each political nationality, french or spanish. <br /> <br /> The definition must be considered as follows:<br /> <br /> ''Catalonia Community covers an area of 32,114 km² and has an official population of 7,210,508[1]. It borders Cerdanya in France and Andorra to the north, Aragon to the west, the Valencian Community to the south, and the Mediterranean Sea to the east (580 km coastline). Official languages are Catalan, Spanish and Aranese.''<br /> <br /> I understand that the separatist ideas of some french and spanish nationalism against the European Union cultural heritage must be erradicated if we want the wikipedia project to progress.<br /> <br /> :I'm sorry but I must disagree with you. There is another concept for the whole catalan-speaking territories and it is [[Catalan Countries]].<br /> :Catalonia's definition is being discussed in the section above (for a long time).--[[User:Civit cardona|Civit cardona]] ([[User talk:Civit cardona|talk]]) 14:04, 15 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> I struggle to believe that Perpignan in France should only be counted as &quot;Catalan speaking&quot;. They fly the Catalan flag, it's historically and cultural strongly Catalan, and the Rugby League team (which should also be mentioned and linked in the article) is called Catalan Dragons. In Catalan the area is called Northern Catalonia. <br /> <br /> I'm sure this is a controversial issue whatever is included in the article, but ignoring Northern Catalonia in the article completely strikes me as a whitewash and not a neutral POV. [[User:Davini994|Davini994]] ([[User talk:Davini994|talk]]) 10:22, 3 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :This article is hijacked by some editors near to spanish unionist positions. I do agree with you that not speaking about the Catalan nation and what and where is North Catalonia is simply a failure of reflecting the Catalan reality. If the article is only speaking about the autonomous community then it should be called 'Autonomous Community of Catalonia'[[Special:Contributions/95.61.18.160|95.61.18.160]] ([[User talk:95.61.18.160|talk]]) 19:09, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Flag of Catalonia ==<br /> <br /> I think that there are some problems with that sentence: &quot;The flag of Catalonia or ''[[Senyera]]'' (''flag'' in [[Catalan language|Catalan]]), is a [[vexillological symbol]] based on the [[coat of arms]] of the [[Crown of Aragon]], which consists of four red stripes on a golden background. It is an official symbol since the Statute of Catalonia of 1932.&quot; The flag was an heraldic emblem of Counts of Barcelona before being in the Crown of Aragon.--[[User:Vilarrubla|Vilar]] 22:48, 19 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Since both claims are correct, next time, instead than removing a correct fact from an article (i.e: &quot;based on the [[coat of arms]] of the [[Crown of Aragon]]&quot;), you should, if willing to add your POV, limit yourself to add to that sentence a &quot;and of the counts of barcelona&quot; instead than erasing the content (which is also fully referenced). --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 01:18, 20 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> ::I have not erased anything and that was not fully referenced. The reference #46 says: &quot;The flag of Catalonia, which is the traditional flag with four red stripes on a yellow background, shall be present on public buildings and during official acts held in Catalonia.&quot; and I don't see anything about Crown of Aragon or Counts of Barcelona in that reference. --[[User:Vilarrubla|Vilar]] 10:45, 20 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == The map ==<br /> <br /> Carles, noticing your last [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=302485241&amp;oldid=302474758 edit], I just want to point you that each and every other article about CCAA has the vectorial map (just take a look yourself). If we want to keep some equality and sense around wikipedia, the correct thing is to leave the other one. there is no real reasons for this article to be the exemption. My thoughts only. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 22:40, 16 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Sorry, Maurice, I beg to disagree. At least the maps for the Valencian Community and the Balearic Islands have also been changed today (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Valencian_Community&amp;diff=302475380&amp;oldid=302426446] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Balearic_Islands&amp;diff=302472767&amp;oldid=302008420]) to this kind of Spain-centered map. So the situation is not like you seem to describe: the map in Catalonia article being a unique strange singularity to be corrected with respect to a long well-established tradition in all the remaining communities. No. The fact is that just now some people propose this new solution. We can discuss it, of course. My initial point is that I prefer the maps those communities have had for a long time because they are more globally-minded and show their position not only inside Spain, but also in a European context. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 23:09, 16 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::Sadly, like so many other times, it is not a point of what we do prefer, but to continue the path followed by the majority of the other articles. Let's not forget that this article is part of an encyclopedia, and as such, all related articles must follow the same guidelines. If you take a look at all the articles about CCAA. Like it or not, the vectorial map seems to be the prefered by all the editors involved in the majority of all those articles. If you take a look at the portuguese districts([[Braga (district)]], [[Bragança (district)]], [[Faro (district)]], [[Lisboa (district)]]...), the french regions ([[Alsace]], [[Champagne-Ardenne]], [Bourgogne]], [[Nord-Pas-de-Calais]], [[Pays de la Loire]], [[Rhône-Alpes]]...) or the italian italian regions ([[Abruzzo]], [[Calabria]], [[Lazio]], [[Marche]], [[Sardinia]], [[Tuscany]]...), you will notice that they all do share the same maps and that are always &quot;country-centered&quot; (if I may say so). Having different types of maps depending on the region selected is in my opinion undesirable.<br /> <br /> ::That said, I believe that the correct thing is to implement the map used by the majority of the articles CCAA-related. In addition, let's not forget that this is this the english wikipedia, and as such, it is like the &quot;international version&quot; of it. If some user from Indonesia wants to learn about a CCAA (let's say Catalonia in this particular case) you can bet for sure he might be much more interested to understand where it is placed in relation to the rest of the country than in relation to Europe.<br /> <br /> ::I think that those are the 2 most important reasons to keep the vectorial map. If someday, Europe really becomes something close enough to a united country, then your position of an europen-minded map should be the one to follow... But only if that is the position for all the articles in wikipedia related to europen regions... Cheers. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 17:45, 17 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::Thanks for your explanation, Maurice, and sorry for my late reply (I am back from holidays just now). I agree with you that homogeneity is good in general, but I'm still not sure whether it constitutes a sufficient reason for the change you propose. I haven't seen any wiki policy enforcing this uniformity, although I agree with you that it is desirable. But, actually, there would be a way to make both of us happy, i.e. to preserve both good properties at once (global-minded maps and homogeneity): uploading maps like those we had during the last years for the Catalan-speaking communities also for the remaining Spanish autonomous communities, right? This is my proposal. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 08:51, 19 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::::I thought you were on vacations... Hope you enjoyed them! I don't mind your proposal but, do you know how to create maps? Because I don't. If nobody uploads those maps for the rest of the CCAA, we get back to start. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 09:49, 19 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::Yes, I've enjoyed them a lot, thanks! :) Good to see that you are open to a proposal that would solve both of our concern at once. As regards to the maps, this seems to completely feasible. I am checking that those files already exist: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Andaluc%C3%ADa.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Extremadura.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Castilla-La_Mancha.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Castilla_y_Le%C3%B3n.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_la_Comunidad_de_Madrid.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Galicia.png], etc. (you see the pattern). So homogeneity is not really a problem. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 10:34, 20 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Hi there Carles. Long time no see. <br /> <br /> I wanted to make you reconsider your position about keeping the european centered maps. For almost one year(?), you have been defending those maps against (quite a lot now) changes by multiple editors to the one used in the rest of CCAA related articles. We already discussed this matter long time ago (uniformity in wikipedia articles, the country being more important than the continent...).<br /> <br /> You know I don't agree with your position, but for the sake of both of us I left your option. But now, you should admit that your opinion is probably a minority.<br /> <br /> Tell me what you think. Cheers. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 10:05, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi Maurice! Nice to meet you here again. Hope you're doing fine.<br /> :I don't completely agree with your analysis of the situation. First, those maps are not my invention. They were already in stable versions of the entries when I joined the project, more than two years ago. Second, after a quick check on the history of the entry on [[Catalonia]], I've counted only four users changing the map to the Spanish-centered one since we discussed the issue. And none of them, unlike you, has bothered to write a single line on the talk page to state their points for the change. On the other hand, there has been one user who has proposed a [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mapa_de_localitzaci%C3%B3_a_les_comarques_catalanes.svg Catalan-centered map] which, coherently with my globally-minded approach, I don't like and I don't support. Therefore, I don't think that &quot;lonely Carles fighting against a majority of users who argue for a Spain-centered map&quot; is a faithful account of the situation, because they are few, they hardly argue, and there have even been proposals in a different direction. In this discussion, we made our positions quite clear. Let me remind my points:<br /> :* The main thing here is to offer an accurate map (faithful to both geographical and political reality) and as informative as possible to help readers from all over the world to locate these regions.<br /> :* In particular, the maps should clearly show the administrative borders of the autonomous communities, their position inside Spain (for they belong to this sovereign state, and nowadays sovereign states are the key element in geopolitical divisions), and their position in a wider context to give the maximum information to non-European readers. All of this can be achieved with the pictures I've been defending.<br /> :* Homogeneity with entries about other regions is certainly a good value to pursue and, as I already showed, it does not contradict any point above, because we already have in Commons maps of this kind (showing both Spanish and European context) for all the remaining Spanish regions.<br /> :--[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera#top|talk]]) 11:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Carles, all the autonomies of Spain have the same map. I understand that you are independentist but this it is not motive for including a map where you cannot see the whole country. I am sorry, but it isn't logical to include a map different to the rest. [[User:Diplomatiko|Diplomatiko]] ([[User talk:Diplomatiko|talk]]) 14:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi, Diplomatiko. Many thanks for joining the discussion. I would like to kindly ask you a couple of things. First, it would help the discussion a lot, if you would read carefully what has been said so far. In particular, you'll find a specific proposal dealing with the uniformity problem you are concerned with. Second, I would appreciate it very much if you would abstain from making assumptions on other users personal views. It doesn't really help the discussion (after all, personal opinions of the editors do not matter much when we are trying to produce a neutral text), and sometimes (this is the case now) you can be misled to wrong conclusions: I am not an independentist (not even a nationalist), as it can be easily seen in the userboxes in my webpage. Anyway, we can forget about this, because talk pages are not meant to discuss about any user, but about the article in question and to decide how to collectively improve it. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 14:50, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :I see you are taking your time to think about it. Fair enough. In the meantime, I shall restore the previous consensual map. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 10:19, 25 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> I'm restoring the regular map (the one which all the other articles use). There's no reason to use another map: NUTS maps don't offer an enough clear sight of a country subdivision location. Furthermore, this (and sometimes the Valencian Community one, for obvious reasons...) is the only country subdivision article in the entire Wikipedia where they're used. [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 21:01, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi Icallbs. Thanks for your comments. But, have you bothered to read the discussion above where I showed that your concerns on homogeneity in Spanish regions entries are compatible with my concerns for globality for non-Spanish readers? Please take a look at it. On the other hand, let me remind that prior to changing a disputed content, you should reach consensus, not the other way around as you have done know (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus#Consensus-building]). Cheers, --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:51, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Maybe you misunderstood &quot;NUTS&quot;. [[NUTS of Spain|These]] are the Spanish NUTS regions, in which the map you use is based. <br /> <br /> :: I've read that discussion, and I must say those maps aren't suitable at all in this kind of articles. They just aren't, just have a look at France's subdivisions articles, or Italy's, or Portugal's, or Poland's. Sadly, I think those &quot;concerns&quot; aren't really &quot;for globality&quot;. Exaxtly because non-Spanish users are the ones who will be reading this, they'll the ones the maps should be adressed to. I encourage you to read the consesus-building article you pointed before for the further seeking of a common point. Other users like MauritiusXIII can help us improving these aspects too. In the meantime, probably the regular map is the better option because of the homogeneity. Also, I'd like you to consider Dr01drpny's option, it's the same map as the rest of Spain's regions and it has the globality element.<br /> <br /> :: [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 18:45, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi. I combined both maps to try to fulfill both concerns regarding homogeneity and wider region location inside Europe. You can add it to the article if you agree with it: [[:File:Localització de Catalunya.png]]. Cheers. --[[User:Dr01drpny|Dr01drpny]] ([[User talk:Dr01drpny|talk]]) 23:45, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi there. Thank you very much, Dr01drpny, for your input. That moves towards the good direction to resolve the dispute, indeed. As for Icallbs, first let me say I'm sorry for having misunderstood the &quot;NUTS&quot; thing; I didn't know that concept. Thank you for pointing it out. However, you might want to apologize as well for assuming bad faith in me when you write &quot;I think those concerns aren't really for globality&quot;. I am proud to claim that all my contributions to Wikipedia (both in articles and in talk pages) are openly honest and faithful to my points of view; it would certainly be stupid to act otherwise when I am editing under my real name. So, this frank globality concern is starting to be addressed by Dr01drpny in his proposal, and I have tentatively tried how it looks in the article. I would like to ask him, since he looks very deft in map creation, to propose some other solutions which could make the European map bigger (now it is too hard to see). An easy solution is to increase the box on the right-bottom corner (there is some space on the sea and Africa that could be covered without problems). A better one would be to create something analogous to the maps used in [[Scotland]], [[Wales]] or [[England]], where the European map is the main one while the whole state (the UK in this case) is also shown in the box, which seems to be something of the highest importance to some users. After seeing (some of) these possibilities we could decide which is the nicest and most suitable for these articles. Needless to say, to satisfy the urge for homogeneity in Spanish autonomous communities articles, the new kind of map will have to be produced for each of them. Looking forward to hearing from all of you, --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:31, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Hi there. I agree with the idea of having a wider (Europe / World) localization map, especially for people from other countries. Still, there are some users who want homogeneity with the maps of all the other regions of Spain. Creating a new version of all these maps is a notable effort, and it would require a deeper consensus (currently the map is being changed almost every day). Maybe something to talk about in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Spain | WikiProject Spain]]. In the meanwhile I uploaded an updated version of the file with a bigger Europe map as Cnoguera asked. You can see the preview [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 | here]. --[[User:Dr01drpny|Dr01drpny]] ([[User talk:Dr01drpny|talk]]) 23:34, 6 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi, thanks again for you valuable help. That one is better indeed, but I still think that something like the UK maps would be even better (both having a clear depiction of the whole state administrative structure, as required by Maurice and Icallbs, and nice big global maps for a globally-minded English encyclopedia as seen e.g. in the UK entries). I suggest to explore that possibility before taking any decision. I understand the non-trivial effort the whole thing requires (and I truly thank you for your excellent technical help), but there certainly are strong concerns about homogeneity by several users, as you can see in the discussion above. As far as I am concerned, as a member of the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Catalan-speaking_Countries]], at least I'll work to have a uniform solution for the three articles under its scope. Sadly enough, while we are fruitfully discussing the issue here, some users like [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/79.153.124.250 this anonymous IP] keep trying to impose their point of view without bothering to contribute to the consensus building. I've already warned him about it. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:38, 7 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :However, if it is too difficult to produce these alternative maps, I suggest to go for the easiest solution and stick to the good old NUTS maps. Moreover there seems to be [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Basque_Country_%28autonomous_community%29#Edit_war_around_locator_map agreement on that elsewhere].--[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 15:27, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: That example doesn't suits our particular case... The country-centered map in that example just sucks! Portugal and France don't even appear. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 19:04, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Oh, yes. You're right, now I see it. I assumed, reasonably, that this discussion in [[Talk:Basque Country (autonomous community)]] was analogous to ours because there actually was an identical edit war proposing the same kind of map. But now I see that the discussion is strangely ignoring that one and proposing an ugly Spain-centered map where the country looks like an island... --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 19:46, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Like an island? Have you seen the German, French, Italian, Portuguese, or basically any other country subdivision article other than the British ones to use world maps for locating a region? It's stupid! Furthermore, the current map shows Portugal, the French border and even North Africa, which is much more than many (probably more than any other but the UK's constituent COUNTRIES [see what I did there?] articles). In the discussion you pointed at, there were only two votes... That's not a &quot;long-standing consensus&quot; nor it shows a reasonable solution. I'm sorry if I've been a bit rough in this comment, but these attempts to vandalize Wikipedia (specially the English one, cause it's the one millions of people from all countries, even non-English, read), trying to mislead them make me really upset. [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 20:34, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Yes, Icallbs, now you look upset indeed. Now you start referring to the proposals you don't like as &quot;stupid&quot; and to their defense as &quot;attempts to vandalize Wikipedia&quot; and &quot;trying to mislead&quot;... You know? it's a bad sign when one needs to use derogative terms to undermine the opponent's position in the discussion. But if you count to ten, take a deep breath, sit back and then read carefully the stuff above again, you'll realize what's written isn't that stupid after all. First, you'll see that the Spain-centered map where the country looks like an island I was referring to is, in fact, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_Comunidad_Vasca.png this one], and the island metaphor was already used in [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Basque_Country_(autonomous_community)#Edit_war_around_locator_map that discussion]. Second, you'll see I only attracted your attention to the Basque Country thing becauses it does resemble the discussion we currently having here, so it might be relevant. Third, you'll see I never described as a &quot;long-standing consensus&quot; what they have there, but I only said that &quot;there SEEMS to be an agreement&quot; there (and it really looks like that, when nobody has expressed any opinion against the NUTS map in that discussion thread; interestingly not even yourself after [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Basque_Country_(autonomous_community)&amp;diff=348810628&amp;oldid=348794880 you added the map you want]).<br /> :The discussion here is certainly far from being over. We are still waiting for new options from Dr01drpny or any other user able to produce them. So I wasn't restoring the NUTS maps (and BTW those are the really long-standing ones as a matter of fact in the Valencian Community, Balearic Islands and Catalonia entries) because of an alleged achievement of a new consensus. I was doing it because otherwise, when the map you like is there, some people seem to completely forget about the discussion and disappear for days. Interestingly enough, they suddenly come back when I restore the previous solution (sometimes yourself, sometimes some mysterious IPs which give little to none explanation for their edits). And, symmetrically, I could as well object that your putting back there the state-centered map is not fair before a decision is reached. But I won't, because my intention is already fulfilled by having people interested again in the discussion, which is the main issue here. Let us proceed then. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 09:51, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> * Please, don't mess this discussion here with the rest of the Autonomous Communities'. IF and only IF there is a general Wikipedia guideline regarding this issue, you can discuss other articles. Otherwise, keep it as a per article discussion and don't change other articles in which you are NOT involved, as the BAC one. We had our own discussion there and reached our own consensus. BTW, I don't get the &quot;goodness&quot; of that island-like map. It's geographical projection is not adequate for representing Spain, nor it does represent accurate detailed maps for each AC, as the green ones do. And again, these maps were replaced recently by anonymous users, probably to match them with the maps used in the Spanish Wiki, that may be are not the most accurate ones, you know. [[User:Deibid|David]] ([[User talk:Deibid|talk]]) 14:49, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: It is that &quot;IF&quot; precisely which I've been looking for weeks! Can't find anything... but I'm sure there is a guideline for these cases. If we find a guideline, we got the solution... I've tried quite a few wikiprojects but nothing... Any ideas, anyone? --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 19:47, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::As an outside observer who has occasionally reverted the wilder changes here ... I get confused exactly which map is which now, but FWIW I think the map should be clear in showing both where Catalonia is within Spain, and also where it is in the context of the wider European area. I'm not sure [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;oldid=352701357 this] version - the current one as I write - does that. It's too close-up, in the main part. I personally prefer the one [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 here], which I think was put together more recently. If you look for example at ones in respect of the UK, eg for [[Wales]] or [[Scotland]], they're even more &quot;global&quot; in perspective. In addition, there should ultimately be consistency across all the Spanish region/nation articles. &lt;small&gt;'''[[User:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;navy&quot;&gt;N-HH&lt;/font&gt;]]''' '''[[User talk:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]/[[Special:Contributions/N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;edits&lt;/font&gt;]]'''&lt;/small&gt; 14:56, 29 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 this version] is clearly the most desirable one. It has what all of us find important on a map. But we do lack of all the other maps for the rest of the Autonomous Communities. If someone knows how to add the small european map on the rest of them (and willing to), the problem is solved. I already tried to some days ago, but to manipulate svg's is beyond my comprehension... ;) --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 07:40, 30 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Catalan vs. Catalonian ==<br /> <br /> Most of the article uses the word &quot;Catalan&quot; as an English demonym adjective in almost all cases. The article even states in the infobox itself that the English demonym is &quot;Catalan&quot;. However, the section on popular culture uses the demonym &quot;Catalonian&quot;. Which is correct, if any? Either the references to &quot;Catalonian&quot; need to be changed to &quot;Catalan&quot; or, alternatively, &quot;Catalonian&quot; should be recognised as a possible demonym. [[User:Madeinsane|Madeinsane]] ([[User talk:Madeinsane|talk]]) 18:57, 13 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> You're right. 'Catalonian' is incorrect, or at least not as correct as 'Catalan'. I've removed the former from the article. That said, the entire section on popular culture needs clearing up. It is very badly written and might also be split to a new page. Any thoughts? --[[User:Tomclarke|Tomclarke]] ([[User talk:Tomclarke|talk]]) 15:15, 20 October 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Goth-Alania &gt; Catalonia ==<br /> <br /> &quot;...the name of the Spanish province Catalonia, which is but a slight deformation of Goth-Alania, &quot;province of the Goths and Alans&quot;...&quot; (from ''Alans'', Encyclopaedia Iranica) http://www.iranica.com/newsite/index.isc?Article=http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/unicode/v1f8/v1f8a013.html [[User:Böri|Böri]] ([[User talk:Böri|talk]]) 14:12, 25 December 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> --This is not true at all, just a fantasy theory, the name Catalonia probably comes from Gothalunda/Gothland &gt; Catalunya or from Castelans(people who lives in castles)&gt; Castelunya &gt; Catalunya <br /> --[[Special:Contributions/79.159.194.238|79.159.194.238]] ([[User talk:79.159.194.238|talk]]) 17:11, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == What ''is'' a nation, anyway? ==<br /> <br /> If you seek the answer to this question in ordinary English dictionaries, you’ll find entries like this:<br /> <br /> :a large aggregate of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular country or territory ''(Oxford New American Dictionary)''<br /> or<br /> :... '''1''' a body of people associated with a particular territory, that is sufficiently conscious of its unity to seek or to possess a government peculiarly its own ''(Webster’s Encyclopedic Dictionary)''<br /> <br /> or<br /> <br /> :... '''2''' a community of persons not constituting a state but bound by common descent, language, history, etc. ''(Collins English Dictionary)''<br /> <br /> So are Wikipedia editors entitled to describe Catalonia as a nation? On the basis of the foregoing, clearly they are. And what about the Spanish Constitutional Court? Well, neither they nor any other institution or legislature have any business to dictate English usage. Many editors (particularly some who are not native English speakers) have failed to take account of this fact. When the term “nation” is used in the context of Catalonia’s legal status, we need to make it quite clear in what sense it’s being used.<br /> <br /> Let me hasten to add that the foregoing mustn’t be taken to imply that I’m supporting a Catalanist position here: that would be to fall into exactly the sort of confusion between linguistic usage and legal definition that I'm criticizing.<br /> <br /> [[User:AdeMiami|AdeMiami]] ([[User talk:AdeMiami|talk]]) 15:51, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Recent edit warring ==<br /> <br /> Look, this back and forth edit warring isn't really helping anything. You guys need to discuss it here. As an outsider with no stake in this, could I clarify a few points and ask people to follow them up below? There seem to be three main issues here -<br /> <br /> ===Nation/region/nationality etc in the lead, post court case===<br /> <br /> Per the above section, I don't think anyone can argue against the idea Catalonia is a &quot;nation&quot; in the broadest sense of the word - in the same way that is is also a &quot;region&quot;, and &quot;area&quot; or whatever, as well as more formally an &quot;Autonomous Community&quot;. The Spanish Constitutional Court ruling would also seem - according to the [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/spain/7861118/Catalonia-can-call-itself-a-nation-rules-Spains-top-court.html Telegraph piece] being cited - to have now more formally confirmed/accepted the use of the term &quot;nation&quot; in the latest Statute of Autonomy. However, it seems that they are saying that precisely because it is simply a vague cultural term that does not have a &quot;legal value&quot; or constitutional implications - ie it's accurate, but not that significant. The issue at stake is what to highlight and prioritise in the lead, and I'm not sure that simply sourcing to the Telegraph piece helps. That article also describes Catalonia as a &quot;region&quot;, and it's not clear on what basis one term is being preferred here over any other. It seems to me that using more formally defined terminology, where the terms wiki-link to pages about terms as they are used in a Spanish context - ie as in [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;oldid=371840349 this version] - would be better.<br /> <br /> :I don't think this formula would work, because the list of Spain's &quot;constituent historical nationalities&quot; has never been laid out and, in any event, it would open a can of worms. One million pounds for those who try (and succeed on) it: would Navarre be part of the Basque nation? Is there a constituent nationality called Castile? If that's so, would Andalusia be part of it (it was part of Castile's Crown, after all..)? Etc, etc.<br /> <br /> :Nor can we accept, as some editor has pretended, that all of Spain's autonomous regions are nationalities. Madrid is an autonomous region, but neither a nation nor a nationality. The same goes for, let's say, Extremadura, Cantabria or Murcia. I'm sorry for being so blunt on the matter, but some of Spain's autonomous regions are nations whereas others are just that: regions. And we all know who's who on this.<br /> <br /> :The points are: <br /> <br /> ::(a) Catalonia's Autonomy Charter describes it as a nation (whether this is legally binding is of no importance: this is Wikipedia, not a constitutionalists' forum). This term ('nation') was sanctioned by (a) Catalonia's Parliament, (b) Spain's Parliament and (c) Catalonia's people in a referendum.<br /> <br /> ::(b) Spain's Constitutional Court has sanctioned its use (again: whether this is legally binding is of no importance: this is Wikipedia, not a constitutionalists' forum). <br /> <br /> ::(c) Countless English-language sources (and this is ''English'' Wikipedia, by the way) describe Catalonia as a nation. Those sources (for instance, The Daily Telegraph) can't be accused of any sort of nationalist leaning. Quite the contrary, as the Irish experience shows to us.<br /> <br /> [[User:Andreas Balart|Andreas Balart]] ([[User talk:Andreas Balart|talk]]) 08:27, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Order of languages===<br /> <br /> Is there a formal, agreed view in the real world of which of Catalan and Spanish is the &quot;main&quot; language, eg by virtue of official recognition as such within Catalonia and/or Spain as a whole, or are there official figures that reveal one language is more commonly spoken as a first language in Catalonia than the other? If so, the order should just follow that. If not, or there's no clear answer on those criteria, how about going by alphabetical order, ie Catalan first (although it would be slightly odd to apply this across all languages and put Aranese right at the top)?<br /> <br /> ===Parliament===<br /> <br /> It seems kind of obvious to me that the Parliament field in the infobox should refer to the Catalan parliament and link to that page, not to the national Spanish parliament. See [[Scotland]] for example.<br /> <br /> Anyway, those are my thoughts, if they help. There's plenty else that needs improving with the rest of the article, and genuine vandalism seems to slip by unnoticed while all this gets edit warred over. --&lt;small&gt;'''[[User:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;navy&quot;&gt;N-HH&lt;/font&gt;]]''' '''[[User talk:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]/[[Special:Contributions/N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;edits&lt;/font&gt;]]'''&lt;/small&gt; 15:23, 5 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Dear '''N-HH''',<br /> <br /> :If anything this point demostrates the sort of people who've hijacked and taken over this article over the last months and years, masquerading their byass as ''consensus'': they were actually ''so'' byassed that they '''deleted any reference''' to Catalonia's Parliament on Catalonia's infobox. It beggars belief.<br /> <br /> :We can put it down to a whole set of prejudices. Otherwise, it is rather difficult to understand this behaviour.<br /> <br /> :For too many months, I've been watching over it. But enough is enough. <br /> <br /> :[[User:Andreas Balart|Andreas Balart]] ([[User talk:Andreas Balart|talk]]) 08:32, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Automate archiving? ==<br /> <br /> Does anyone object to me setting up automatic archiving for this page using MiszaBot? Unless otherwise agreed, I would set it to archive threads that have been inactive for 30 days and keep ten threads.--[[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] ([[User talk:Oneiros|talk]]) 20:43, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :{{done}}--[[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] ([[User talk:Oneiros|talk]]) 13:47, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Spain high court rules against &quot;nation&quot; term ==<br /> <br /> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100710/ap_on_re_eu/eu_spain_catalan_charter &lt;span style=&quot;font-size: smaller;&quot; class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/75.85.14.106|75.85.14.106]] ([[User talk:75.85.14.106|talk]]) 02:14, 11 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;!-- Template:UnsignedIP --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;<br /> <br /> :No credit shoud be paid to anonymous vandalist comments<br /> :[[User:Eva Grossjean|Eva Grossjean]] ([[User talk:Eva Grossjean|talk]]) 14:11, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> ::Wikipedia is about speaking from the facts, not only from part of the political POV or from the legal POV (legal but not moral as the decisions of Spanish Constitutional Court are more than discussed). Anyone at Catalonia knows a significant part of the people living there feels that part of Spain as a nation with right of self-governing and any source considered trustable should reflect that. Any editor not trusting this can search about the Catalan display on this 11th July and will see that spanish high court is simply applying a centralist POV. BR anonymous. [[Special:Contributions/95.61.18.160|95.61.18.160]] ([[User talk:95.61.18.160|talk]]) 19:00, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Catalonia is not a nation (at least legally) but a historical nationality. ==<br /> <br /> Spain's Constitutional Court accepts the definition as nation for Catalonia but has no legal value. For legal purposes is still considered a historical nationality and in any case should not be included within the framework of political status. Catalonia is only an autonomous region of Spain. &lt;small&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Arkarull|Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Arkarull|contribs]]) 13:54, 12 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/small&gt;&lt;!-- Template:Unsigned --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;<br /> <br /> <br /> :Spain's constitutional Court is not the only POV ,and obviously is an interested POV. It is internationally accepted that part of the Catalan population feels Catalonia as a nation. It is a case very similar to Quebec so no such debate makes sense. The spanish constituional court is just an interested part in the conflict.[[Special:Contributions/95.61.18.160|95.61.18.160]] ([[User talk:95.61.18.160|talk]]) 19:03, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::For an encyclopedia the only valid POV is the legal POV, and in Spain the Constituctional Court's decissions are definitives. If Wikipedia doesn't respect that, a lot of other articles must be corrected. Scotland, for example, is only a historical country of United Kingdom or is a nation? I am Spanish but I respect the Catalan nationalism, as it has perfect historical foundations, and I think they are a nation, of course, but include social or personal POV in a section intended to the political situation, whatever it is, for better or for worse, is not encyclopedic. [[Special:Contributions/Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]]) 12:00, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Arkarull, the decission about nation/nationality is not any personal POV but it's sufficently backed up by legal texts. The Constitutional Court has ruled that the term 'nation' ''stands'' on Catalonia's autonomy charter's preamble, which, by the way, doubles as an organical law of the Spanish State (ie. passed by both Congress and Senate). <br /> <br /> :Whether or not this has legal consequences (it has not, according to the Court) is of no importance to Wikipedia. The point here is that the law (Spanish as well as Catalan) '''describes''' Catalonia as a nation. And all we do here in WP is to describe things.<br /> <br /> :Now: the Spanish Constitution does also acknowlege that Spain is made up of regions and nationalities. The fact that no list has been made as to which territories qualify as regions and which ones as nationalities doesn't mean that we ''all'' know who's who here: Is Catalonia a nationality? For sure. Is La Rioja a nationality? Of course not.<br /> <br /> :Finally, once we've accepted the 'nationality' terms as experessed in the Spanish Constitution, a purely linguistic point kicks into: 'nationality' implies the existence of a 'nation'. As Wikipedia states:<br /> <br /> ::Nationality is membership of a nation ''or'' sovereign state. Nationality can be acquired by being born within the jurisdiction of a state, by inheriting it from parents, or by a process of naturalization. ...<br /> ::en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationality<br /> <br /> :Therefore, if we accept the Constitutional existence of nationalities, it automatically derives in the existence of nations.<br /> <br /> [[User:Eva Grossjean|Eva Grossjean]] ([[User talk:Eva Grossjean|talk]]) 11:36, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::Ok, Eva, we both agree in that for us Catalonia is a Nation. But I think thar for legal purposes is not a clear idea:<br /> :::'''''Artículo 2 de la Constitución Española''': La Constitución se fundamenta en la indisoluble unidad de la Nación española, patria común e indivisible de todos los españoles, y reconoce y garantiza el derecho a la autonomía de las nacionalidades y regiones que la integran y la solidaridad entre todas ellas''. ('''Article 2 of the Spanish Constitution''': The Constitution is based on the indissoluble unity of the Spanish Nation, common and indivisible homeland of all Spanish, and recognizes and guarantees the right to autonomy of nationalities and regions which comprise and solidarity among them.)<br /> ::Therefore, the Constitution accepts the existence of &quot;nationalities&quot;, but aggregated into a single Nation, the Spanish. As a result, the Constitutional Court ruled that the designation as a nation that does the Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia (2006) in its preamble has no legal validity. Wikipedia's article for''nationality''not worth me because, as one librarian of this encyclopedia said to me once, Wikipedia is not Wikipedia's reference.<br /> ::In any case, this debate is sterile because the article has already been corrected by someone, replacing &quot;nation&quot; with &quot;nationality.&quot; &lt;small&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Arkarull|Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Arkarull|contribs]]) 17:47, 13 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/small&gt;&lt;!-- Template:Unsigned --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;<br /> <br /> <br /> Nations are not defined solely by Constitutions, mon cher Arkarull.<br /> <br /> If that was the case, the USA could never be considered a nation, since a definition of the United States as a nation is nowhere to be seen in there. And yet, they are a nation--and what a nation, by the way!<br /> <br /> Britain, on the other hand, does not even have a written Constitution to back her nationhood. And yet, it is another nation.<br /> <br /> As I wrote before in this forum, some people mix 'statehood' with 'nationhood'. Gross mistake: sometimes they might coincide, but some other times they might not.<br /> <br /> This legalistic insistence on the Spanish Constitution demonstrates, if anything, a large degree of intellectual laziness.<br /> <br /> xxx<br /> [[Special:Contributions/81.39.12.15|81.39.12.15]] ([[User talk:81.39.12.15|talk]]) 16:21, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Absolutely, my condescending friend, but I guess you'll understand that I defends the rights of a country, in this case mine, to be judge by its own rules. So, as you agree that in Spain some territories are called Autonomous Comunities, while in USA they call States as well as relevant laws stipulate, when their functions are almost identical, we can also accept that the political and legal definitions are framed in Spanish constitutional frameworks that set Spanish as the only Nation, not excluding the existence of nationalities. You can consider this stupid, centralist or incoherent, but it is what it is. And it is says by one of the few Spanish, born in Madrid, who consider Catalonia a nation. But I also differentiate between what I think and what is legally OK, that's what fits in this discussion. And I differentiate clearly between state and nation, thanks. Furthermore, I believe that you can defend yours opinions without resorting to insult.<br /> And sorry for my poor English. It's probably my &quot;large degree of intellectual laziness&quot;. &lt;small&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Arkarull|Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Arkarull|contribs]]) 18:11, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> ::''Mon cher'' Arkarull,<br /> <br /> ::It is not an insult, it's just a depiction. Using the Spanish Constitution as the holy graal, the only source of description of an otherwise lively, diverse country it's empoverishing and, yes, intellectually lazy (Spaniards, having suffered long centuries of Inquisition and even longer centuries of narrow-minded Catholicism are particulatly prone to this sort of mechanical, one-sided reasoning. I feel really sorry for you, ''mon cher ami'', for having missed the benefits of the Protestant Reformation).<br /> <br /> ::Nations are '''not''' defined by Constitutions--at least not ''only'' by Constitutions. If that was the case, neither the United States nor the United Kingdom would qualify as such, as there's no mention about their nationhood in their Constitutions (or ''non''-Constitutions, such as in the British case). <br /> <br /> ::You can copy/paste as many articles of your Constitution as you like, ''mon chéri''. Your argument simply does not hold water. Constitutionalists do not make or break nations, nor judges. It's the people who make them by enbodying them. Catalonia's nationhood, in that regard, is out of the question. <br /> <br /> ::Please, be so kind so as to provide more solid lines of argument in order to deny Catalonia's nationhood. Any qualified source (please, no Constitutional scarecrows) will be warmly welcome.<br /> <br /> ::[[User:Eva Grossjean|Eva Grossjean]] ([[User talk:Eva Grossjean|talk]]) 20:22, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Ok, Eva. I will not go into your game. In any case you should know that sociology has evolved a bit since Weber. It's amazing how in one paragraph you have insulted Spain, the Spanish, the Catholic tradition, and so on. You should review a little the History before returning to the topics of the Inquisition and the innate stupidity transmitted through Catholicism. I will repeat it again to see if you can assimilate without insulting even if you disagree:<br /> <br /> * I believe strongly that Catalonia is a nation in its own right.<br /> * I do not disapprove the inclusion in the article the conflict nation-no nation, I support that and not go any opinion, and of course they are present nationalist claims as Catalonia has a long historical journey as an independent nation.<br /> * But I have to accept that Catalonia, today, like it or not, is part of Spain, and LEGALLY, the only valid laws are the spanish ones, are laws adopted by the Congress of Deputies, the Catalan Parliament or constitutional requirements. Do you want to get in a philosophical, sociological and political discussion about the right to be a nation of Catalonia? Isn't necessary. We would agree, although it seems you do not read my messages because you repeat that I do not believe this reality. But one thing is what you or I believe and the truth is other one. I think the death penalty is unfair and out of any right, but I accept that if I go to Texas and commit a particular crime will be sentenced to death penalty. Put that in Texas there is no death penalty because there are groups against, even if for me they are right, it would be illogical. <br /> * I'd tried to talk with you with respect. I can be wrong, but to prove you must present something more than insults and condescension. Of course I love my country, like you love yours I supossed, but that doesn't mean that I'm not capable of assimilating other realities.<br /> * Surprise! I am Spanish and I'm not stupid! You'll be surprised, but this is a beautiful country, with very good people and a great History. And also great professionals, scientists and intellectuals. I invite you to visit us and know our history to prevent fall in outdated clichés.<br /> * Finally. I'm not your ''mon chéri''. Although these chocolates are very good. If you're not going to bring nothing but insults I ask you to stop posting messages and let a more polite and fruitful discussion. Don't forget that I have started this not to impose my vision, when I could have deleted the term &quot;nation&quot; in the article simply.</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Catalonia&diff=373481807 2010-07-14T18:12:24Z

<p>Arkarull: /* Catalonia is not a nation (at least legally) but a historical nationality. */</p> <hr /> <div>{{Skip to talk}}<br /> {{Talk header|search=yes}}<br /> {{Off topic warning}}<br /> {{Controversial3}}<br /> {{WikiProject Spain|class=c|importance=top}}<br /> {{WikiProject Catalan-speaker|class=c|importance=top}}<br /> {{OnThisDay|date1=2004-09-11|oldid1=9955831}}<br /> {{auto archiving notice|bot=MiszaBot|age=30|dounreplied=yes}}<br /> {{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn<br /> |target=Talk:Catalonia/Archive index<br /> |mask=Talk:Catalonia/Archive &lt;#&gt;<br /> |leading_zeros=0<br /> |indexhere=yes}}<br /> {{User:MiszaBot/config<br /> |archiveheader = {{aan}}<br /> |maxarchivesize = 200K<br /> |counter = 5<br /> |minthreadsleft = 10<br /> |minthreadstoarchive = 1<br /> |algo = old(30d)<br /> |archive = Talk:Catalonia/Archive %(counter)d<br /> }}<br /> <br /> == Catalonia definition must me corrected ==<br /> <br /> We must differentiate between geographic and politics definition.<br /> Catalonia is a geographical area comprising actual Catalan Community in Spain and Cerdanya which actually is the french department of Pyrinèes Oriental. If there is any reference to Catalonia as a nation, it must cover all Catalonia and not merely the Catalan Community of Spain.<br /> Both populations consider theirselves Catalans sharing the same Catalan language, (even it is not considered an official language in France because political assumptions) whith respect for each political nationality, french or spanish. <br /> <br /> The definition must be considered as follows:<br /> <br /> ''Catalonia Community covers an area of 32,114 km² and has an official population of 7,210,508[1]. It borders Cerdanya in France and Andorra to the north, Aragon to the west, the Valencian Community to the south, and the Mediterranean Sea to the east (580 km coastline). Official languages are Catalan, Spanish and Aranese.''<br /> <br /> I understand that the separatist ideas of some french and spanish nationalism against the European Union cultural heritage must be erradicated if we want the wikipedia project to progress.<br /> <br /> :I'm sorry but I must disagree with you. There is another concept for the whole catalan-speaking territories and it is [[Catalan Countries]].<br /> :Catalonia's definition is being discussed in the section above (for a long time).--[[User:Civit cardona|Civit cardona]] ([[User talk:Civit cardona|talk]]) 14:04, 15 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> I struggle to believe that Perpignan in France should only be counted as &quot;Catalan speaking&quot;. They fly the Catalan flag, it's historically and cultural strongly Catalan, and the Rugby League team (which should also be mentioned and linked in the article) is called Catalan Dragons. In Catalan the area is called Northern Catalonia. <br /> <br /> I'm sure this is a controversial issue whatever is included in the article, but ignoring Northern Catalonia in the article completely strikes me as a whitewash and not a neutral POV. [[User:Davini994|Davini994]] ([[User talk:Davini994|talk]]) 10:22, 3 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :This article is hijacked by some editors near to spanish unionist positions. I do agree with you that not speaking about the Catalan nation and what and where is North Catalonia is simply a failure of reflecting the Catalan reality. If the article is only speaking about the autonomous community then it should be called 'Autonomous Community of Catalonia'[[Special:Contributions/95.61.18.160|95.61.18.160]] ([[User talk:95.61.18.160|talk]]) 19:09, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Flag of Catalonia ==<br /> <br /> I think that there are some problems with that sentence: &quot;The flag of Catalonia or ''[[Senyera]]'' (''flag'' in [[Catalan language|Catalan]]), is a [[vexillological symbol]] based on the [[coat of arms]] of the [[Crown of Aragon]], which consists of four red stripes on a golden background. It is an official symbol since the Statute of Catalonia of 1932.&quot; The flag was an heraldic emblem of Counts of Barcelona before being in the Crown of Aragon.--[[User:Vilarrubla|Vilar]] 22:48, 19 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Since both claims are correct, next time, instead than removing a correct fact from an article (i.e: &quot;based on the [[coat of arms]] of the [[Crown of Aragon]]&quot;), you should, if willing to add your POV, limit yourself to add to that sentence a &quot;and of the counts of barcelona&quot; instead than erasing the content (which is also fully referenced). --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 01:18, 20 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> ::I have not erased anything and that was not fully referenced. The reference #46 says: &quot;The flag of Catalonia, which is the traditional flag with four red stripes on a yellow background, shall be present on public buildings and during official acts held in Catalonia.&quot; and I don't see anything about Crown of Aragon or Counts of Barcelona in that reference. --[[User:Vilarrubla|Vilar]] 10:45, 20 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == The map ==<br /> <br /> Carles, noticing your last [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=302485241&amp;oldid=302474758 edit], I just want to point you that each and every other article about CCAA has the vectorial map (just take a look yourself). If we want to keep some equality and sense around wikipedia, the correct thing is to leave the other one. there is no real reasons for this article to be the exemption. My thoughts only. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 22:40, 16 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Sorry, Maurice, I beg to disagree. At least the maps for the Valencian Community and the Balearic Islands have also been changed today (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Valencian_Community&amp;diff=302475380&amp;oldid=302426446] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Balearic_Islands&amp;diff=302472767&amp;oldid=302008420]) to this kind of Spain-centered map. So the situation is not like you seem to describe: the map in Catalonia article being a unique strange singularity to be corrected with respect to a long well-established tradition in all the remaining communities. No. The fact is that just now some people propose this new solution. We can discuss it, of course. My initial point is that I prefer the maps those communities have had for a long time because they are more globally-minded and show their position not only inside Spain, but also in a European context. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 23:09, 16 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::Sadly, like so many other times, it is not a point of what we do prefer, but to continue the path followed by the majority of the other articles. Let's not forget that this article is part of an encyclopedia, and as such, all related articles must follow the same guidelines. If you take a look at all the articles about CCAA. Like it or not, the vectorial map seems to be the prefered by all the editors involved in the majority of all those articles. If you take a look at the portuguese districts([[Braga (district)]], [[Bragança (district)]], [[Faro (district)]], [[Lisboa (district)]]...), the french regions ([[Alsace]], [[Champagne-Ardenne]], [Bourgogne]], [[Nord-Pas-de-Calais]], [[Pays de la Loire]], [[Rhône-Alpes]]...) or the italian italian regions ([[Abruzzo]], [[Calabria]], [[Lazio]], [[Marche]], [[Sardinia]], [[Tuscany]]...), you will notice that they all do share the same maps and that are always &quot;country-centered&quot; (if I may say so). Having different types of maps depending on the region selected is in my opinion undesirable.<br /> <br /> ::That said, I believe that the correct thing is to implement the map used by the majority of the articles CCAA-related. In addition, let's not forget that this is this the english wikipedia, and as such, it is like the &quot;international version&quot; of it. If some user from Indonesia wants to learn about a CCAA (let's say Catalonia in this particular case) you can bet for sure he might be much more interested to understand where it is placed in relation to the rest of the country than in relation to Europe.<br /> <br /> ::I think that those are the 2 most important reasons to keep the vectorial map. If someday, Europe really becomes something close enough to a united country, then your position of an europen-minded map should be the one to follow... But only if that is the position for all the articles in wikipedia related to europen regions... Cheers. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 17:45, 17 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::Thanks for your explanation, Maurice, and sorry for my late reply (I am back from holidays just now). I agree with you that homogeneity is good in general, but I'm still not sure whether it constitutes a sufficient reason for the change you propose. I haven't seen any wiki policy enforcing this uniformity, although I agree with you that it is desirable. But, actually, there would be a way to make both of us happy, i.e. to preserve both good properties at once (global-minded maps and homogeneity): uploading maps like those we had during the last years for the Catalan-speaking communities also for the remaining Spanish autonomous communities, right? This is my proposal. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 08:51, 19 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::::I thought you were on vacations... Hope you enjoyed them! I don't mind your proposal but, do you know how to create maps? Because I don't. If nobody uploads those maps for the rest of the CCAA, we get back to start. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 09:49, 19 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::Yes, I've enjoyed them a lot, thanks! :) Good to see that you are open to a proposal that would solve both of our concern at once. As regards to the maps, this seems to completely feasible. I am checking that those files already exist: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Andaluc%C3%ADa.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Extremadura.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Castilla-La_Mancha.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Castilla_y_Le%C3%B3n.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_la_Comunidad_de_Madrid.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Galicia.png], etc. (you see the pattern). So homogeneity is not really a problem. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 10:34, 20 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Hi there Carles. Long time no see. <br /> <br /> I wanted to make you reconsider your position about keeping the european centered maps. For almost one year(?), you have been defending those maps against (quite a lot now) changes by multiple editors to the one used in the rest of CCAA related articles. We already discussed this matter long time ago (uniformity in wikipedia articles, the country being more important than the continent...).<br /> <br /> You know I don't agree with your position, but for the sake of both of us I left your option. But now, you should admit that your opinion is probably a minority.<br /> <br /> Tell me what you think. Cheers. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 10:05, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi Maurice! Nice to meet you here again. Hope you're doing fine.<br /> :I don't completely agree with your analysis of the situation. First, those maps are not my invention. They were already in stable versions of the entries when I joined the project, more than two years ago. Second, after a quick check on the history of the entry on [[Catalonia]], I've counted only four users changing the map to the Spanish-centered one since we discussed the issue. And none of them, unlike you, has bothered to write a single line on the talk page to state their points for the change. On the other hand, there has been one user who has proposed a [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mapa_de_localitzaci%C3%B3_a_les_comarques_catalanes.svg Catalan-centered map] which, coherently with my globally-minded approach, I don't like and I don't support. Therefore, I don't think that &quot;lonely Carles fighting against a majority of users who argue for a Spain-centered map&quot; is a faithful account of the situation, because they are few, they hardly argue, and there have even been proposals in a different direction. In this discussion, we made our positions quite clear. Let me remind my points:<br /> :* The main thing here is to offer an accurate map (faithful to both geographical and political reality) and as informative as possible to help readers from all over the world to locate these regions.<br /> :* In particular, the maps should clearly show the administrative borders of the autonomous communities, their position inside Spain (for they belong to this sovereign state, and nowadays sovereign states are the key element in geopolitical divisions), and their position in a wider context to give the maximum information to non-European readers. All of this can be achieved with the pictures I've been defending.<br /> :* Homogeneity with entries about other regions is certainly a good value to pursue and, as I already showed, it does not contradict any point above, because we already have in Commons maps of this kind (showing both Spanish and European context) for all the remaining Spanish regions.<br /> :--[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera#top|talk]]) 11:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Carles, all the autonomies of Spain have the same map. I understand that you are independentist but this it is not motive for including a map where you cannot see the whole country. I am sorry, but it isn't logical to include a map different to the rest. [[User:Diplomatiko|Diplomatiko]] ([[User talk:Diplomatiko|talk]]) 14:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi, Diplomatiko. Many thanks for joining the discussion. I would like to kindly ask you a couple of things. First, it would help the discussion a lot, if you would read carefully what has been said so far. In particular, you'll find a specific proposal dealing with the uniformity problem you are concerned with. Second, I would appreciate it very much if you would abstain from making assumptions on other users personal views. It doesn't really help the discussion (after all, personal opinions of the editors do not matter much when we are trying to produce a neutral text), and sometimes (this is the case now) you can be misled to wrong conclusions: I am not an independentist (not even a nationalist), as it can be easily seen in the userboxes in my webpage. Anyway, we can forget about this, because talk pages are not meant to discuss about any user, but about the article in question and to decide how to collectively improve it. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 14:50, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :I see you are taking your time to think about it. Fair enough. In the meantime, I shall restore the previous consensual map. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 10:19, 25 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> I'm restoring the regular map (the one which all the other articles use). There's no reason to use another map: NUTS maps don't offer an enough clear sight of a country subdivision location. Furthermore, this (and sometimes the Valencian Community one, for obvious reasons...) is the only country subdivision article in the entire Wikipedia where they're used. [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 21:01, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi Icallbs. Thanks for your comments. But, have you bothered to read the discussion above where I showed that your concerns on homogeneity in Spanish regions entries are compatible with my concerns for globality for non-Spanish readers? Please take a look at it. On the other hand, let me remind that prior to changing a disputed content, you should reach consensus, not the other way around as you have done know (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus#Consensus-building]). Cheers, --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:51, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Maybe you misunderstood &quot;NUTS&quot;. [[NUTS of Spain|These]] are the Spanish NUTS regions, in which the map you use is based. <br /> <br /> :: I've read that discussion, and I must say those maps aren't suitable at all in this kind of articles. They just aren't, just have a look at France's subdivisions articles, or Italy's, or Portugal's, or Poland's. Sadly, I think those &quot;concerns&quot; aren't really &quot;for globality&quot;. Exaxtly because non-Spanish users are the ones who will be reading this, they'll the ones the maps should be adressed to. I encourage you to read the consesus-building article you pointed before for the further seeking of a common point. Other users like MauritiusXIII can help us improving these aspects too. In the meantime, probably the regular map is the better option because of the homogeneity. Also, I'd like you to consider Dr01drpny's option, it's the same map as the rest of Spain's regions and it has the globality element.<br /> <br /> :: [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 18:45, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi. I combined both maps to try to fulfill both concerns regarding homogeneity and wider region location inside Europe. You can add it to the article if you agree with it: [[:File:Localització de Catalunya.png]]. Cheers. --[[User:Dr01drpny|Dr01drpny]] ([[User talk:Dr01drpny|talk]]) 23:45, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi there. Thank you very much, Dr01drpny, for your input. That moves towards the good direction to resolve the dispute, indeed. As for Icallbs, first let me say I'm sorry for having misunderstood the &quot;NUTS&quot; thing; I didn't know that concept. Thank you for pointing it out. However, you might want to apologize as well for assuming bad faith in me when you write &quot;I think those concerns aren't really for globality&quot;. I am proud to claim that all my contributions to Wikipedia (both in articles and in talk pages) are openly honest and faithful to my points of view; it would certainly be stupid to act otherwise when I am editing under my real name. So, this frank globality concern is starting to be addressed by Dr01drpny in his proposal, and I have tentatively tried how it looks in the article. I would like to ask him, since he looks very deft in map creation, to propose some other solutions which could make the European map bigger (now it is too hard to see). An easy solution is to increase the box on the right-bottom corner (there is some space on the sea and Africa that could be covered without problems). A better one would be to create something analogous to the maps used in [[Scotland]], [[Wales]] or [[England]], where the European map is the main one while the whole state (the UK in this case) is also shown in the box, which seems to be something of the highest importance to some users. After seeing (some of) these possibilities we could decide which is the nicest and most suitable for these articles. Needless to say, to satisfy the urge for homogeneity in Spanish autonomous communities articles, the new kind of map will have to be produced for each of them. Looking forward to hearing from all of you, --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:31, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Hi there. I agree with the idea of having a wider (Europe / World) localization map, especially for people from other countries. Still, there are some users who want homogeneity with the maps of all the other regions of Spain. Creating a new version of all these maps is a notable effort, and it would require a deeper consensus (currently the map is being changed almost every day). Maybe something to talk about in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Spain | WikiProject Spain]]. In the meanwhile I uploaded an updated version of the file with a bigger Europe map as Cnoguera asked. You can see the preview [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 | here]. --[[User:Dr01drpny|Dr01drpny]] ([[User talk:Dr01drpny|talk]]) 23:34, 6 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi, thanks again for you valuable help. That one is better indeed, but I still think that something like the UK maps would be even better (both having a clear depiction of the whole state administrative structure, as required by Maurice and Icallbs, and nice big global maps for a globally-minded English encyclopedia as seen e.g. in the UK entries). I suggest to explore that possibility before taking any decision. I understand the non-trivial effort the whole thing requires (and I truly thank you for your excellent technical help), but there certainly are strong concerns about homogeneity by several users, as you can see in the discussion above. As far as I am concerned, as a member of the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Catalan-speaking_Countries]], at least I'll work to have a uniform solution for the three articles under its scope. Sadly enough, while we are fruitfully discussing the issue here, some users like [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/79.153.124.250 this anonymous IP] keep trying to impose their point of view without bothering to contribute to the consensus building. I've already warned him about it. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:38, 7 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :However, if it is too difficult to produce these alternative maps, I suggest to go for the easiest solution and stick to the good old NUTS maps. Moreover there seems to be [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Basque_Country_%28autonomous_community%29#Edit_war_around_locator_map agreement on that elsewhere].--[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 15:27, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: That example doesn't suits our particular case... The country-centered map in that example just sucks! Portugal and France don't even appear. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 19:04, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Oh, yes. You're right, now I see it. I assumed, reasonably, that this discussion in [[Talk:Basque Country (autonomous community)]] was analogous to ours because there actually was an identical edit war proposing the same kind of map. But now I see that the discussion is strangely ignoring that one and proposing an ugly Spain-centered map where the country looks like an island... --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 19:46, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Like an island? Have you seen the German, French, Italian, Portuguese, or basically any other country subdivision article other than the British ones to use world maps for locating a region? It's stupid! Furthermore, the current map shows Portugal, the French border and even North Africa, which is much more than many (probably more than any other but the UK's constituent COUNTRIES [see what I did there?] articles). In the discussion you pointed at, there were only two votes... That's not a &quot;long-standing consensus&quot; nor it shows a reasonable solution. I'm sorry if I've been a bit rough in this comment, but these attempts to vandalize Wikipedia (specially the English one, cause it's the one millions of people from all countries, even non-English, read), trying to mislead them make me really upset. [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 20:34, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Yes, Icallbs, now you look upset indeed. Now you start referring to the proposals you don't like as &quot;stupid&quot; and to their defense as &quot;attempts to vandalize Wikipedia&quot; and &quot;trying to mislead&quot;... You know? it's a bad sign when one needs to use derogative terms to undermine the opponent's position in the discussion. But if you count to ten, take a deep breath, sit back and then read carefully the stuff above again, you'll realize what's written isn't that stupid after all. First, you'll see that the Spain-centered map where the country looks like an island I was referring to is, in fact, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_Comunidad_Vasca.png this one], and the island metaphor was already used in [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Basque_Country_(autonomous_community)#Edit_war_around_locator_map that discussion]. Second, you'll see I only attracted your attention to the Basque Country thing becauses it does resemble the discussion we currently having here, so it might be relevant. Third, you'll see I never described as a &quot;long-standing consensus&quot; what they have there, but I only said that &quot;there SEEMS to be an agreement&quot; there (and it really looks like that, when nobody has expressed any opinion against the NUTS map in that discussion thread; interestingly not even yourself after [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Basque_Country_(autonomous_community)&amp;diff=348810628&amp;oldid=348794880 you added the map you want]).<br /> :The discussion here is certainly far from being over. We are still waiting for new options from Dr01drpny or any other user able to produce them. So I wasn't restoring the NUTS maps (and BTW those are the really long-standing ones as a matter of fact in the Valencian Community, Balearic Islands and Catalonia entries) because of an alleged achievement of a new consensus. I was doing it because otherwise, when the map you like is there, some people seem to completely forget about the discussion and disappear for days. Interestingly enough, they suddenly come back when I restore the previous solution (sometimes yourself, sometimes some mysterious IPs which give little to none explanation for their edits). And, symmetrically, I could as well object that your putting back there the state-centered map is not fair before a decision is reached. But I won't, because my intention is already fulfilled by having people interested again in the discussion, which is the main issue here. Let us proceed then. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 09:51, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> * Please, don't mess this discussion here with the rest of the Autonomous Communities'. IF and only IF there is a general Wikipedia guideline regarding this issue, you can discuss other articles. Otherwise, keep it as a per article discussion and don't change other articles in which you are NOT involved, as the BAC one. We had our own discussion there and reached our own consensus. BTW, I don't get the &quot;goodness&quot; of that island-like map. It's geographical projection is not adequate for representing Spain, nor it does represent accurate detailed maps for each AC, as the green ones do. And again, these maps were replaced recently by anonymous users, probably to match them with the maps used in the Spanish Wiki, that may be are not the most accurate ones, you know. [[User:Deibid|David]] ([[User talk:Deibid|talk]]) 14:49, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: It is that &quot;IF&quot; precisely which I've been looking for weeks! Can't find anything... but I'm sure there is a guideline for these cases. If we find a guideline, we got the solution... I've tried quite a few wikiprojects but nothing... Any ideas, anyone? --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 19:47, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::As an outside observer who has occasionally reverted the wilder changes here ... I get confused exactly which map is which now, but FWIW I think the map should be clear in showing both where Catalonia is within Spain, and also where it is in the context of the wider European area. I'm not sure [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;oldid=352701357 this] version - the current one as I write - does that. It's too close-up, in the main part. I personally prefer the one [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 here], which I think was put together more recently. If you look for example at ones in respect of the UK, eg for [[Wales]] or [[Scotland]], they're even more &quot;global&quot; in perspective. In addition, there should ultimately be consistency across all the Spanish region/nation articles. &lt;small&gt;'''[[User:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;navy&quot;&gt;N-HH&lt;/font&gt;]]''' '''[[User talk:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]/[[Special:Contributions/N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;edits&lt;/font&gt;]]'''&lt;/small&gt; 14:56, 29 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 this version] is clearly the most desirable one. It has what all of us find important on a map. But we do lack of all the other maps for the rest of the Autonomous Communities. If someone knows how to add the small european map on the rest of them (and willing to), the problem is solved. I already tried to some days ago, but to manipulate svg's is beyond my comprehension... ;) --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 07:40, 30 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Catalan vs. Catalonian ==<br /> <br /> Most of the article uses the word &quot;Catalan&quot; as an English demonym adjective in almost all cases. The article even states in the infobox itself that the English demonym is &quot;Catalan&quot;. However, the section on popular culture uses the demonym &quot;Catalonian&quot;. Which is correct, if any? Either the references to &quot;Catalonian&quot; need to be changed to &quot;Catalan&quot; or, alternatively, &quot;Catalonian&quot; should be recognised as a possible demonym. [[User:Madeinsane|Madeinsane]] ([[User talk:Madeinsane|talk]]) 18:57, 13 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> You're right. 'Catalonian' is incorrect, or at least not as correct as 'Catalan'. I've removed the former from the article. That said, the entire section on popular culture needs clearing up. It is very badly written and might also be split to a new page. Any thoughts? --[[User:Tomclarke|Tomclarke]] ([[User talk:Tomclarke|talk]]) 15:15, 20 October 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Goth-Alania &gt; Catalonia ==<br /> <br /> &quot;...the name of the Spanish province Catalonia, which is but a slight deformation of Goth-Alania, &quot;province of the Goths and Alans&quot;...&quot; (from ''Alans'', Encyclopaedia Iranica) http://www.iranica.com/newsite/index.isc?Article=http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/unicode/v1f8/v1f8a013.html [[User:Böri|Böri]] ([[User talk:Böri|talk]]) 14:12, 25 December 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> --This is not true at all, just a fantasy theory, the name Catalonia probably comes from Gothalunda/Gothland &gt; Catalunya or from Castelans(people who lives in castles)&gt; Castelunya &gt; Catalunya <br /> --[[Special:Contributions/79.159.194.238|79.159.194.238]] ([[User talk:79.159.194.238|talk]]) 17:11, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == What ''is'' a nation, anyway? ==<br /> <br /> If you seek the answer to this question in ordinary English dictionaries, you’ll find entries like this:<br /> <br /> :a large aggregate of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular country or territory ''(Oxford New American Dictionary)''<br /> or<br /> :... '''1''' a body of people associated with a particular territory, that is sufficiently conscious of its unity to seek or to possess a government peculiarly its own ''(Webster’s Encyclopedic Dictionary)''<br /> <br /> or<br /> <br /> :... '''2''' a community of persons not constituting a state but bound by common descent, language, history, etc. ''(Collins English Dictionary)''<br /> <br /> So are Wikipedia editors entitled to describe Catalonia as a nation? On the basis of the foregoing, clearly they are. And what about the Spanish Constitutional Court? Well, neither they nor any other institution or legislature have any business to dictate English usage. Many editors (particularly some who are not native English speakers) have failed to take account of this fact. When the term “nation” is used in the context of Catalonia’s legal status, we need to make it quite clear in what sense it’s being used.<br /> <br /> Let me hasten to add that the foregoing mustn’t be taken to imply that I’m supporting a Catalanist position here: that would be to fall into exactly the sort of confusion between linguistic usage and legal definition that I'm criticizing.<br /> <br /> [[User:AdeMiami|AdeMiami]] ([[User talk:AdeMiami|talk]]) 15:51, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Recent edit warring ==<br /> <br /> Look, this back and forth edit warring isn't really helping anything. You guys need to discuss it here. As an outsider with no stake in this, could I clarify a few points and ask people to follow them up below? There seem to be three main issues here -<br /> <br /> ===Nation/region/nationality etc in the lead, post court case===<br /> <br /> Per the above section, I don't think anyone can argue against the idea Catalonia is a &quot;nation&quot; in the broadest sense of the word - in the same way that is is also a &quot;region&quot;, and &quot;area&quot; or whatever, as well as more formally an &quot;Autonomous Community&quot;. The Spanish Constitutional Court ruling would also seem - according to the [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/spain/7861118/Catalonia-can-call-itself-a-nation-rules-Spains-top-court.html Telegraph piece] being cited - to have now more formally confirmed/accepted the use of the term &quot;nation&quot; in the latest Statute of Autonomy. However, it seems that they are saying that precisely because it is simply a vague cultural term that does not have a &quot;legal value&quot; or constitutional implications - ie it's accurate, but not that significant. The issue at stake is what to highlight and prioritise in the lead, and I'm not sure that simply sourcing to the Telegraph piece helps. That article also describes Catalonia as a &quot;region&quot;, and it's not clear on what basis one term is being preferred here over any other. It seems to me that using more formally defined terminology, where the terms wiki-link to pages about terms as they are used in a Spanish context - ie as in [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;oldid=371840349 this version] - would be better.<br /> <br /> :I don't think this formula would work, because the list of Spain's &quot;constituent historical nationalities&quot; has never been laid out and, in any event, it would open a can of worms. One million pounds for those who try (and succeed on) it: would Navarre be part of the Basque nation? Is there a constituent nationality called Castile? If that's so, would Andalusia be part of it (it was part of Castile's Crown, after all..)? Etc, etc.<br /> <br /> :Nor can we accept, as some editor has pretended, that all of Spain's autonomous regions are nationalities. Madrid is an autonomous region, but neither a nation nor a nationality. The same goes for, let's say, Extremadura, Cantabria or Murcia. I'm sorry for being so blunt on the matter, but some of Spain's autonomous regions are nations whereas others are just that: regions. And we all know who's who on this.<br /> <br /> :The points are: <br /> <br /> ::(a) Catalonia's Autonomy Charter describes it as a nation (whether this is legally binding is of no importance: this is Wikipedia, not a constitutionalists' forum). This term ('nation') was sanctioned by (a) Catalonia's Parliament, (b) Spain's Parliament and (c) Catalonia's people in a referendum.<br /> <br /> ::(b) Spain's Constitutional Court has sanctioned its use (again: whether this is legally binding is of no importance: this is Wikipedia, not a constitutionalists' forum). <br /> <br /> ::(c) Countless English-language sources (and this is ''English'' Wikipedia, by the way) describe Catalonia as a nation. Those sources (for instance, The Daily Telegraph) can't be accused of any sort of nationalist leaning. Quite the contrary, as the Irish experience shows to us.<br /> <br /> [[User:Andreas Balart|Andreas Balart]] ([[User talk:Andreas Balart|talk]]) 08:27, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Order of languages===<br /> <br /> Is there a formal, agreed view in the real world of which of Catalan and Spanish is the &quot;main&quot; language, eg by virtue of official recognition as such within Catalonia and/or Spain as a whole, or are there official figures that reveal one language is more commonly spoken as a first language in Catalonia than the other? If so, the order should just follow that. If not, or there's no clear answer on those criteria, how about going by alphabetical order, ie Catalan first (although it would be slightly odd to apply this across all languages and put Aranese right at the top)?<br /> <br /> ===Parliament===<br /> <br /> It seems kind of obvious to me that the Parliament field in the infobox should refer to the Catalan parliament and link to that page, not to the national Spanish parliament. See [[Scotland]] for example.<br /> <br /> Anyway, those are my thoughts, if they help. There's plenty else that needs improving with the rest of the article, and genuine vandalism seems to slip by unnoticed while all this gets edit warred over. --&lt;small&gt;'''[[User:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;navy&quot;&gt;N-HH&lt;/font&gt;]]''' '''[[User talk:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]/[[Special:Contributions/N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;edits&lt;/font&gt;]]'''&lt;/small&gt; 15:23, 5 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Dear '''N-HH''',<br /> <br /> :If anything this point demostrates the sort of people who've hijacked and taken over this article over the last months and years, masquerading their byass as ''consensus'': they were actually ''so'' byassed that they '''deleted any reference''' to Catalonia's Parliament on Catalonia's infobox. It beggars belief.<br /> <br /> :We can put it down to a whole set of prejudices. Otherwise, it is rather difficult to understand this behaviour.<br /> <br /> :For too many months, I've been watching over it. But enough is enough. <br /> <br /> :[[User:Andreas Balart|Andreas Balart]] ([[User talk:Andreas Balart|talk]]) 08:32, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Automate archiving? ==<br /> <br /> Does anyone object to me setting up automatic archiving for this page using MiszaBot? Unless otherwise agreed, I would set it to archive threads that have been inactive for 30 days and keep ten threads.--[[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] ([[User talk:Oneiros|talk]]) 20:43, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :{{done}}--[[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] ([[User talk:Oneiros|talk]]) 13:47, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Spain high court rules against &quot;nation&quot; term ==<br /> <br /> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100710/ap_on_re_eu/eu_spain_catalan_charter &lt;span style=&quot;font-size: smaller;&quot; class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/75.85.14.106|75.85.14.106]] ([[User talk:75.85.14.106|talk]]) 02:14, 11 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;!-- Template:UnsignedIP --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;<br /> <br /> :No credit shoud be paid to anonymous vandalist comments<br /> :[[User:Eva Grossjean|Eva Grossjean]] ([[User talk:Eva Grossjean|talk]]) 14:11, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> ::Wikipedia is about speaking from the facts, not only from part of the political POV or from the legal POV (legal but not moral as the decisions of Spanish Constitutional Court are more than discussed). Anyone at Catalonia knows a significant part of the people living there feels that part of Spain as a nation with right of self-governing and any source considered trustable should reflect that. Any editor not trusting this can search about the Catalan display on this 11th July and will see that spanish high court is simply applying a centralist POV. BR anonymous. [[Special:Contributions/95.61.18.160|95.61.18.160]] ([[User talk:95.61.18.160|talk]]) 19:00, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Catalonia is not a nation (at least legally) but a historical nationality. ==<br /> <br /> Spain's Constitutional Court accepts the definition as nation for Catalonia but has no legal value. For legal purposes is still considered a historical nationality and in any case should not be included within the framework of political status. Catalonia is only an autonomous region of Spain. &lt;small&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Arkarull|Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Arkarull|contribs]]) 13:54, 12 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/small&gt;&lt;!-- Template:Unsigned --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;<br /> <br /> <br /> :Spain's constitutional Court is not the only POV ,and obviously is an interested POV. It is internationally accepted that part of the Catalan population feels Catalonia as a nation. It is a case very similar to Quebec so no such debate makes sense. The spanish constituional court is just an interested part in the conflict.[[Special:Contributions/95.61.18.160|95.61.18.160]] ([[User talk:95.61.18.160|talk]]) 19:03, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::For an encyclopedia the only valid POV is the legal POV, and in Spain the Constituctional Court's decissions are definitives. If Wikipedia doesn't respect that, a lot of other articles must be corrected. Scotland, for example, is only a historical country of United Kingdom or is a nation? I am Spanish but I respect the Catalan nationalism, as it has perfect historical foundations, and I think they are a nation, of course, but include social or personal POV in a section intended to the political situation, whatever it is, for better or for worse, is not encyclopedic. [[Special:Contributions/Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]]) 12:00, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Arkarull, the decission about nation/nationality is not any personal POV but it's sufficently backed up by legal texts. The Constitutional Court has ruled that the term 'nation' ''stands'' on Catalonia's autonomy charter's preamble, which, by the way, doubles as an organical law of the Spanish State (ie. passed by both Congress and Senate). <br /> <br /> :Whether or not this has legal consequences (it has not, according to the Court) is of no importance to Wikipedia. The point here is that the law (Spanish as well as Catalan) '''describes''' Catalonia as a nation. And all we do here in WP is to describe things.<br /> <br /> :Now: the Spanish Constitution does also acknowlege that Spain is made up of regions and nationalities. The fact that no list has been made as to which territories qualify as regions and which ones as nationalities doesn't mean that we ''all'' know who's who here: Is Catalonia a nationality? For sure. Is La Rioja a nationality? Of course not.<br /> <br /> :Finally, once we've accepted the 'nationality' terms as experessed in the Spanish Constitution, a purely linguistic point kicks into: 'nationality' implies the existence of a 'nation'. As Wikipedia states:<br /> <br /> ::Nationality is membership of a nation ''or'' sovereign state. Nationality can be acquired by being born within the jurisdiction of a state, by inheriting it from parents, or by a process of naturalization. ...<br /> ::en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationality<br /> <br /> :Therefore, if we accept the Constitutional existence of nationalities, it automatically derives in the existence of nations.<br /> <br /> [[User:Eva Grossjean|Eva Grossjean]] ([[User talk:Eva Grossjean|talk]]) 11:36, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::Ok, Eva, we both agree in that for us Catalonia is a Nation. But I think thar for legal purposes is not a clear idea:<br /> :::'''''Artículo 2 de la Constitución Española''': La Constitución se fundamenta en la indisoluble unidad de la Nación española, patria común e indivisible de todos los españoles, y reconoce y garantiza el derecho a la autonomía de las nacionalidades y regiones que la integran y la solidaridad entre todas ellas''. ('''Article 2 of the Spanish Constitution''': The Constitution is based on the indissoluble unity of the Spanish Nation, common and indivisible homeland of all Spanish, and recognizes and guarantees the right to autonomy of nationalities and regions which comprise and solidarity among them.)<br /> ::Therefore, the Constitution accepts the existence of &quot;nationalities&quot;, but aggregated into a single Nation, the Spanish. As a result, the Constitutional Court ruled that the designation as a nation that does the Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia (2006) in its preamble has no legal validity. Wikipedia's article for''nationality''not worth me because, as one librarian of this encyclopedia said to me once, Wikipedia is not Wikipedia's reference.<br /> ::In any case, this debate is sterile because the article has already been corrected by someone, replacing &quot;nation&quot; with &quot;nationality.&quot; &lt;small&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Arkarull|Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Arkarull|contribs]]) 17:47, 13 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/small&gt;&lt;!-- Template:Unsigned --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;<br /> <br /> <br /> Nations are not defined solely by Constitutions, mon cher Arkarull.<br /> <br /> If that was the case, the USA could never be considered a nation, since a definition of the United States as a nation is nowhere to be seen in there. And yet, they are a nation--and what a nation, by the way!<br /> <br /> Britain, on the other hand, does not even have a written Constitution to back her nationhood. And yet, it is another nation.<br /> <br /> As I wrote before in this forum, some people mix 'statehood' with 'nationhood'. Gross mistake: sometimes they might coincide, but some other times they might not.<br /> <br /> This legalistic insistence on the Spanish Constitution demonstrates, if anything, a large degree of intellectual laziness.<br /> <br /> xxx<br /> [[Special:Contributions/81.39.12.15|81.39.12.15]] ([[User talk:81.39.12.15|talk]]) 16:21, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Absolutely, my condescending friend, but I guess you'll understand that I defends the rights of a country, in this case mine, to be judge by its own rules. So, as you agree that in Spain some territories are called Autonomous Comunities, while in USA they call States as well as relevant laws stipulate, when their functions are almost identical, we can also accept that the political and legal definitions are framed in Spanish constitutional frameworks that set Spanish as the only Nation, not excluding the existence of nationalities. You can consider this stupid, centralist or incoherent, but it is what it is. And it is says by one of the few Spanish, born in Madrid, who consider Catalonia a nation. But I also differentiate between what I think and what is legally OK, that's what fits in this discussion. And I differentiate clearly between state and nation, thanks. Furthermore, I believe that you can defend yours opinions without resorting to insult.<br /> And sorry for my poor English. It's probably my &quot;large degree of intellectual laziness&quot;. &lt;small&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Arkarull|Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Arkarull|contribs]]) 18:11, 14 July 2010 (UTC)</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Catalonia&diff=373481612 2010-07-14T18:11:20Z

<p>Arkarull: /* Catalonia is not a nation (at least legally) but a historical nationality. */</p> <hr /> <div>{{Skip to talk}}<br /> {{Talk header|search=yes}}<br /> {{Off topic warning}}<br /> {{Controversial3}}<br /> {{WikiProject Spain|class=c|importance=top}}<br /> {{WikiProject Catalan-speaker|class=c|importance=top}}<br /> {{OnThisDay|date1=2004-09-11|oldid1=9955831}}<br /> {{auto archiving notice|bot=MiszaBot|age=30|dounreplied=yes}}<br /> {{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn<br /> |target=Talk:Catalonia/Archive index<br /> |mask=Talk:Catalonia/Archive &lt;#&gt;<br /> |leading_zeros=0<br /> |indexhere=yes}}<br /> {{User:MiszaBot/config<br /> |archiveheader = {{aan}}<br /> |maxarchivesize = 200K<br /> |counter = 5<br /> |minthreadsleft = 10<br /> |minthreadstoarchive = 1<br /> |algo = old(30d)<br /> |archive = Talk:Catalonia/Archive %(counter)d<br /> }}<br /> <br /> == Catalonia definition must me corrected ==<br /> <br /> We must differentiate between geographic and politics definition.<br /> Catalonia is a geographical area comprising actual Catalan Community in Spain and Cerdanya which actually is the french department of Pyrinèes Oriental. If there is any reference to Catalonia as a nation, it must cover all Catalonia and not merely the Catalan Community of Spain.<br /> Both populations consider theirselves Catalans sharing the same Catalan language, (even it is not considered an official language in France because political assumptions) whith respect for each political nationality, french or spanish. <br /> <br /> The definition must be considered as follows:<br /> <br /> ''Catalonia Community covers an area of 32,114 km² and has an official population of 7,210,508[1]. It borders Cerdanya in France and Andorra to the north, Aragon to the west, the Valencian Community to the south, and the Mediterranean Sea to the east (580 km coastline). Official languages are Catalan, Spanish and Aranese.''<br /> <br /> I understand that the separatist ideas of some french and spanish nationalism against the European Union cultural heritage must be erradicated if we want the wikipedia project to progress.<br /> <br /> :I'm sorry but I must disagree with you. There is another concept for the whole catalan-speaking territories and it is [[Catalan Countries]].<br /> :Catalonia's definition is being discussed in the section above (for a long time).--[[User:Civit cardona|Civit cardona]] ([[User talk:Civit cardona|talk]]) 14:04, 15 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> I struggle to believe that Perpignan in France should only be counted as &quot;Catalan speaking&quot;. They fly the Catalan flag, it's historically and cultural strongly Catalan, and the Rugby League team (which should also be mentioned and linked in the article) is called Catalan Dragons. In Catalan the area is called Northern Catalonia. <br /> <br /> I'm sure this is a controversial issue whatever is included in the article, but ignoring Northern Catalonia in the article completely strikes me as a whitewash and not a neutral POV. [[User:Davini994|Davini994]] ([[User talk:Davini994|talk]]) 10:22, 3 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :This article is hijacked by some editors near to spanish unionist positions. I do agree with you that not speaking about the Catalan nation and what and where is North Catalonia is simply a failure of reflecting the Catalan reality. If the article is only speaking about the autonomous community then it should be called 'Autonomous Community of Catalonia'[[Special:Contributions/95.61.18.160|95.61.18.160]] ([[User talk:95.61.18.160|talk]]) 19:09, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Flag of Catalonia ==<br /> <br /> I think that there are some problems with that sentence: &quot;The flag of Catalonia or ''[[Senyera]]'' (''flag'' in [[Catalan language|Catalan]]), is a [[vexillological symbol]] based on the [[coat of arms]] of the [[Crown of Aragon]], which consists of four red stripes on a golden background. It is an official symbol since the Statute of Catalonia of 1932.&quot; The flag was an heraldic emblem of Counts of Barcelona before being in the Crown of Aragon.--[[User:Vilarrubla|Vilar]] 22:48, 19 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Since both claims are correct, next time, instead than removing a correct fact from an article (i.e: &quot;based on the [[coat of arms]] of the [[Crown of Aragon]]&quot;), you should, if willing to add your POV, limit yourself to add to that sentence a &quot;and of the counts of barcelona&quot; instead than erasing the content (which is also fully referenced). --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 01:18, 20 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> ::I have not erased anything and that was not fully referenced. The reference #46 says: &quot;The flag of Catalonia, which is the traditional flag with four red stripes on a yellow background, shall be present on public buildings and during official acts held in Catalonia.&quot; and I don't see anything about Crown of Aragon or Counts of Barcelona in that reference. --[[User:Vilarrubla|Vilar]] 10:45, 20 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == The map ==<br /> <br /> Carles, noticing your last [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=302485241&amp;oldid=302474758 edit], I just want to point you that each and every other article about CCAA has the vectorial map (just take a look yourself). If we want to keep some equality and sense around wikipedia, the correct thing is to leave the other one. there is no real reasons for this article to be the exemption. My thoughts only. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 22:40, 16 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Sorry, Maurice, I beg to disagree. At least the maps for the Valencian Community and the Balearic Islands have also been changed today (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Valencian_Community&amp;diff=302475380&amp;oldid=302426446] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Balearic_Islands&amp;diff=302472767&amp;oldid=302008420]) to this kind of Spain-centered map. So the situation is not like you seem to describe: the map in Catalonia article being a unique strange singularity to be corrected with respect to a long well-established tradition in all the remaining communities. No. The fact is that just now some people propose this new solution. We can discuss it, of course. My initial point is that I prefer the maps those communities have had for a long time because they are more globally-minded and show their position not only inside Spain, but also in a European context. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 23:09, 16 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::Sadly, like so many other times, it is not a point of what we do prefer, but to continue the path followed by the majority of the other articles. Let's not forget that this article is part of an encyclopedia, and as such, all related articles must follow the same guidelines. If you take a look at all the articles about CCAA. Like it or not, the vectorial map seems to be the prefered by all the editors involved in the majority of all those articles. If you take a look at the portuguese districts([[Braga (district)]], [[Bragança (district)]], [[Faro (district)]], [[Lisboa (district)]]...), the french regions ([[Alsace]], [[Champagne-Ardenne]], [Bourgogne]], [[Nord-Pas-de-Calais]], [[Pays de la Loire]], [[Rhône-Alpes]]...) or the italian italian regions ([[Abruzzo]], [[Calabria]], [[Lazio]], [[Marche]], [[Sardinia]], [[Tuscany]]...), you will notice that they all do share the same maps and that are always &quot;country-centered&quot; (if I may say so). Having different types of maps depending on the region selected is in my opinion undesirable.<br /> <br /> ::That said, I believe that the correct thing is to implement the map used by the majority of the articles CCAA-related. In addition, let's not forget that this is this the english wikipedia, and as such, it is like the &quot;international version&quot; of it. If some user from Indonesia wants to learn about a CCAA (let's say Catalonia in this particular case) you can bet for sure he might be much more interested to understand where it is placed in relation to the rest of the country than in relation to Europe.<br /> <br /> ::I think that those are the 2 most important reasons to keep the vectorial map. If someday, Europe really becomes something close enough to a united country, then your position of an europen-minded map should be the one to follow... But only if that is the position for all the articles in wikipedia related to europen regions... Cheers. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 17:45, 17 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::Thanks for your explanation, Maurice, and sorry for my late reply (I am back from holidays just now). I agree with you that homogeneity is good in general, but I'm still not sure whether it constitutes a sufficient reason for the change you propose. I haven't seen any wiki policy enforcing this uniformity, although I agree with you that it is desirable. But, actually, there would be a way to make both of us happy, i.e. to preserve both good properties at once (global-minded maps and homogeneity): uploading maps like those we had during the last years for the Catalan-speaking communities also for the remaining Spanish autonomous communities, right? This is my proposal. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 08:51, 19 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::::I thought you were on vacations... Hope you enjoyed them! I don't mind your proposal but, do you know how to create maps? Because I don't. If nobody uploads those maps for the rest of the CCAA, we get back to start. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 09:49, 19 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::Yes, I've enjoyed them a lot, thanks! :) Good to see that you are open to a proposal that would solve both of our concern at once. As regards to the maps, this seems to completely feasible. I am checking that those files already exist: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Andaluc%C3%ADa.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Extremadura.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Castilla-La_Mancha.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Castilla_y_Le%C3%B3n.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_la_Comunidad_de_Madrid.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Galicia.png], etc. (you see the pattern). So homogeneity is not really a problem. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 10:34, 20 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Hi there Carles. Long time no see. <br /> <br /> I wanted to make you reconsider your position about keeping the european centered maps. For almost one year(?), you have been defending those maps against (quite a lot now) changes by multiple editors to the one used in the rest of CCAA related articles. We already discussed this matter long time ago (uniformity in wikipedia articles, the country being more important than the continent...).<br /> <br /> You know I don't agree with your position, but for the sake of both of us I left your option. But now, you should admit that your opinion is probably a minority.<br /> <br /> Tell me what you think. Cheers. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 10:05, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi Maurice! Nice to meet you here again. Hope you're doing fine.<br /> :I don't completely agree with your analysis of the situation. First, those maps are not my invention. They were already in stable versions of the entries when I joined the project, more than two years ago. Second, after a quick check on the history of the entry on [[Catalonia]], I've counted only four users changing the map to the Spanish-centered one since we discussed the issue. And none of them, unlike you, has bothered to write a single line on the talk page to state their points for the change. On the other hand, there has been one user who has proposed a [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mapa_de_localitzaci%C3%B3_a_les_comarques_catalanes.svg Catalan-centered map] which, coherently with my globally-minded approach, I don't like and I don't support. Therefore, I don't think that &quot;lonely Carles fighting against a majority of users who argue for a Spain-centered map&quot; is a faithful account of the situation, because they are few, they hardly argue, and there have even been proposals in a different direction. In this discussion, we made our positions quite clear. Let me remind my points:<br /> :* The main thing here is to offer an accurate map (faithful to both geographical and political reality) and as informative as possible to help readers from all over the world to locate these regions.<br /> :* In particular, the maps should clearly show the administrative borders of the autonomous communities, their position inside Spain (for they belong to this sovereign state, and nowadays sovereign states are the key element in geopolitical divisions), and their position in a wider context to give the maximum information to non-European readers. All of this can be achieved with the pictures I've been defending.<br /> :* Homogeneity with entries about other regions is certainly a good value to pursue and, as I already showed, it does not contradict any point above, because we already have in Commons maps of this kind (showing both Spanish and European context) for all the remaining Spanish regions.<br /> :--[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera#top|talk]]) 11:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Carles, all the autonomies of Spain have the same map. I understand that you are independentist but this it is not motive for including a map where you cannot see the whole country. I am sorry, but it isn't logical to include a map different to the rest. [[User:Diplomatiko|Diplomatiko]] ([[User talk:Diplomatiko|talk]]) 14:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi, Diplomatiko. Many thanks for joining the discussion. I would like to kindly ask you a couple of things. First, it would help the discussion a lot, if you would read carefully what has been said so far. In particular, you'll find a specific proposal dealing with the uniformity problem you are concerned with. Second, I would appreciate it very much if you would abstain from making assumptions on other users personal views. It doesn't really help the discussion (after all, personal opinions of the editors do not matter much when we are trying to produce a neutral text), and sometimes (this is the case now) you can be misled to wrong conclusions: I am not an independentist (not even a nationalist), as it can be easily seen in the userboxes in my webpage. Anyway, we can forget about this, because talk pages are not meant to discuss about any user, but about the article in question and to decide how to collectively improve it. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 14:50, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :I see you are taking your time to think about it. Fair enough. In the meantime, I shall restore the previous consensual map. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 10:19, 25 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> I'm restoring the regular map (the one which all the other articles use). There's no reason to use another map: NUTS maps don't offer an enough clear sight of a country subdivision location. Furthermore, this (and sometimes the Valencian Community one, for obvious reasons...) is the only country subdivision article in the entire Wikipedia where they're used. [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 21:01, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi Icallbs. Thanks for your comments. But, have you bothered to read the discussion above where I showed that your concerns on homogeneity in Spanish regions entries are compatible with my concerns for globality for non-Spanish readers? Please take a look at it. On the other hand, let me remind that prior to changing a disputed content, you should reach consensus, not the other way around as you have done know (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus#Consensus-building]). Cheers, --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:51, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Maybe you misunderstood &quot;NUTS&quot;. [[NUTS of Spain|These]] are the Spanish NUTS regions, in which the map you use is based. <br /> <br /> :: I've read that discussion, and I must say those maps aren't suitable at all in this kind of articles. They just aren't, just have a look at France's subdivisions articles, or Italy's, or Portugal's, or Poland's. Sadly, I think those &quot;concerns&quot; aren't really &quot;for globality&quot;. Exaxtly because non-Spanish users are the ones who will be reading this, they'll the ones the maps should be adressed to. I encourage you to read the consesus-building article you pointed before for the further seeking of a common point. Other users like MauritiusXIII can help us improving these aspects too. In the meantime, probably the regular map is the better option because of the homogeneity. Also, I'd like you to consider Dr01drpny's option, it's the same map as the rest of Spain's regions and it has the globality element.<br /> <br /> :: [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 18:45, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi. I combined both maps to try to fulfill both concerns regarding homogeneity and wider region location inside Europe. You can add it to the article if you agree with it: [[:File:Localització de Catalunya.png]]. Cheers. --[[User:Dr01drpny|Dr01drpny]] ([[User talk:Dr01drpny|talk]]) 23:45, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi there. Thank you very much, Dr01drpny, for your input. That moves towards the good direction to resolve the dispute, indeed. As for Icallbs, first let me say I'm sorry for having misunderstood the &quot;NUTS&quot; thing; I didn't know that concept. Thank you for pointing it out. However, you might want to apologize as well for assuming bad faith in me when you write &quot;I think those concerns aren't really for globality&quot;. I am proud to claim that all my contributions to Wikipedia (both in articles and in talk pages) are openly honest and faithful to my points of view; it would certainly be stupid to act otherwise when I am editing under my real name. So, this frank globality concern is starting to be addressed by Dr01drpny in his proposal, and I have tentatively tried how it looks in the article. I would like to ask him, since he looks very deft in map creation, to propose some other solutions which could make the European map bigger (now it is too hard to see). An easy solution is to increase the box on the right-bottom corner (there is some space on the sea and Africa that could be covered without problems). A better one would be to create something analogous to the maps used in [[Scotland]], [[Wales]] or [[England]], where the European map is the main one while the whole state (the UK in this case) is also shown in the box, which seems to be something of the highest importance to some users. After seeing (some of) these possibilities we could decide which is the nicest and most suitable for these articles. Needless to say, to satisfy the urge for homogeneity in Spanish autonomous communities articles, the new kind of map will have to be produced for each of them. Looking forward to hearing from all of you, --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:31, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Hi there. I agree with the idea of having a wider (Europe / World) localization map, especially for people from other countries. Still, there are some users who want homogeneity with the maps of all the other regions of Spain. Creating a new version of all these maps is a notable effort, and it would require a deeper consensus (currently the map is being changed almost every day). Maybe something to talk about in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Spain | WikiProject Spain]]. In the meanwhile I uploaded an updated version of the file with a bigger Europe map as Cnoguera asked. You can see the preview [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 | here]. --[[User:Dr01drpny|Dr01drpny]] ([[User talk:Dr01drpny|talk]]) 23:34, 6 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi, thanks again for you valuable help. That one is better indeed, but I still think that something like the UK maps would be even better (both having a clear depiction of the whole state administrative structure, as required by Maurice and Icallbs, and nice big global maps for a globally-minded English encyclopedia as seen e.g. in the UK entries). I suggest to explore that possibility before taking any decision. I understand the non-trivial effort the whole thing requires (and I truly thank you for your excellent technical help), but there certainly are strong concerns about homogeneity by several users, as you can see in the discussion above. As far as I am concerned, as a member of the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Catalan-speaking_Countries]], at least I'll work to have a uniform solution for the three articles under its scope. Sadly enough, while we are fruitfully discussing the issue here, some users like [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/79.153.124.250 this anonymous IP] keep trying to impose their point of view without bothering to contribute to the consensus building. I've already warned him about it. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:38, 7 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :However, if it is too difficult to produce these alternative maps, I suggest to go for the easiest solution and stick to the good old NUTS maps. Moreover there seems to be [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Basque_Country_%28autonomous_community%29#Edit_war_around_locator_map agreement on that elsewhere].--[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 15:27, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: That example doesn't suits our particular case... The country-centered map in that example just sucks! Portugal and France don't even appear. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 19:04, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Oh, yes. You're right, now I see it. I assumed, reasonably, that this discussion in [[Talk:Basque Country (autonomous community)]] was analogous to ours because there actually was an identical edit war proposing the same kind of map. But now I see that the discussion is strangely ignoring that one and proposing an ugly Spain-centered map where the country looks like an island... --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 19:46, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Like an island? Have you seen the German, French, Italian, Portuguese, or basically any other country subdivision article other than the British ones to use world maps for locating a region? It's stupid! Furthermore, the current map shows Portugal, the French border and even North Africa, which is much more than many (probably more than any other but the UK's constituent COUNTRIES [see what I did there?] articles). In the discussion you pointed at, there were only two votes... That's not a &quot;long-standing consensus&quot; nor it shows a reasonable solution. I'm sorry if I've been a bit rough in this comment, but these attempts to vandalize Wikipedia (specially the English one, cause it's the one millions of people from all countries, even non-English, read), trying to mislead them make me really upset. [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 20:34, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Yes, Icallbs, now you look upset indeed. Now you start referring to the proposals you don't like as &quot;stupid&quot; and to their defense as &quot;attempts to vandalize Wikipedia&quot; and &quot;trying to mislead&quot;... You know? it's a bad sign when one needs to use derogative terms to undermine the opponent's position in the discussion. But if you count to ten, take a deep breath, sit back and then read carefully the stuff above again, you'll realize what's written isn't that stupid after all. First, you'll see that the Spain-centered map where the country looks like an island I was referring to is, in fact, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_Comunidad_Vasca.png this one], and the island metaphor was already used in [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Basque_Country_(autonomous_community)#Edit_war_around_locator_map that discussion]. Second, you'll see I only attracted your attention to the Basque Country thing becauses it does resemble the discussion we currently having here, so it might be relevant. Third, you'll see I never described as a &quot;long-standing consensus&quot; what they have there, but I only said that &quot;there SEEMS to be an agreement&quot; there (and it really looks like that, when nobody has expressed any opinion against the NUTS map in that discussion thread; interestingly not even yourself after [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Basque_Country_(autonomous_community)&amp;diff=348810628&amp;oldid=348794880 you added the map you want]).<br /> :The discussion here is certainly far from being over. We are still waiting for new options from Dr01drpny or any other user able to produce them. So I wasn't restoring the NUTS maps (and BTW those are the really long-standing ones as a matter of fact in the Valencian Community, Balearic Islands and Catalonia entries) because of an alleged achievement of a new consensus. I was doing it because otherwise, when the map you like is there, some people seem to completely forget about the discussion and disappear for days. Interestingly enough, they suddenly come back when I restore the previous solution (sometimes yourself, sometimes some mysterious IPs which give little to none explanation for their edits). And, symmetrically, I could as well object that your putting back there the state-centered map is not fair before a decision is reached. But I won't, because my intention is already fulfilled by having people interested again in the discussion, which is the main issue here. Let us proceed then. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 09:51, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> * Please, don't mess this discussion here with the rest of the Autonomous Communities'. IF and only IF there is a general Wikipedia guideline regarding this issue, you can discuss other articles. Otherwise, keep it as a per article discussion and don't change other articles in which you are NOT involved, as the BAC one. We had our own discussion there and reached our own consensus. BTW, I don't get the &quot;goodness&quot; of that island-like map. It's geographical projection is not adequate for representing Spain, nor it does represent accurate detailed maps for each AC, as the green ones do. And again, these maps were replaced recently by anonymous users, probably to match them with the maps used in the Spanish Wiki, that may be are not the most accurate ones, you know. [[User:Deibid|David]] ([[User talk:Deibid|talk]]) 14:49, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: It is that &quot;IF&quot; precisely which I've been looking for weeks! Can't find anything... but I'm sure there is a guideline for these cases. If we find a guideline, we got the solution... I've tried quite a few wikiprojects but nothing... Any ideas, anyone? --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 19:47, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::As an outside observer who has occasionally reverted the wilder changes here ... I get confused exactly which map is which now, but FWIW I think the map should be clear in showing both where Catalonia is within Spain, and also where it is in the context of the wider European area. I'm not sure [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;oldid=352701357 this] version - the current one as I write - does that. It's too close-up, in the main part. I personally prefer the one [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 here], which I think was put together more recently. If you look for example at ones in respect of the UK, eg for [[Wales]] or [[Scotland]], they're even more &quot;global&quot; in perspective. In addition, there should ultimately be consistency across all the Spanish region/nation articles. &lt;small&gt;'''[[User:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;navy&quot;&gt;N-HH&lt;/font&gt;]]''' '''[[User talk:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]/[[Special:Contributions/N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;edits&lt;/font&gt;]]'''&lt;/small&gt; 14:56, 29 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 this version] is clearly the most desirable one. It has what all of us find important on a map. But we do lack of all the other maps for the rest of the Autonomous Communities. If someone knows how to add the small european map on the rest of them (and willing to), the problem is solved. I already tried to some days ago, but to manipulate svg's is beyond my comprehension... ;) --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 07:40, 30 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Catalan vs. Catalonian ==<br /> <br /> Most of the article uses the word &quot;Catalan&quot; as an English demonym adjective in almost all cases. The article even states in the infobox itself that the English demonym is &quot;Catalan&quot;. However, the section on popular culture uses the demonym &quot;Catalonian&quot;. Which is correct, if any? Either the references to &quot;Catalonian&quot; need to be changed to &quot;Catalan&quot; or, alternatively, &quot;Catalonian&quot; should be recognised as a possible demonym. [[User:Madeinsane|Madeinsane]] ([[User talk:Madeinsane|talk]]) 18:57, 13 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> You're right. 'Catalonian' is incorrect, or at least not as correct as 'Catalan'. I've removed the former from the article. That said, the entire section on popular culture needs clearing up. It is very badly written and might also be split to a new page. Any thoughts? --[[User:Tomclarke|Tomclarke]] ([[User talk:Tomclarke|talk]]) 15:15, 20 October 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Goth-Alania &gt; Catalonia ==<br /> <br /> &quot;...the name of the Spanish province Catalonia, which is but a slight deformation of Goth-Alania, &quot;province of the Goths and Alans&quot;...&quot; (from ''Alans'', Encyclopaedia Iranica) http://www.iranica.com/newsite/index.isc?Article=http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/unicode/v1f8/v1f8a013.html [[User:Böri|Böri]] ([[User talk:Böri|talk]]) 14:12, 25 December 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> --This is not true at all, just a fantasy theory, the name Catalonia probably comes from Gothalunda/Gothland &gt; Catalunya or from Castelans(people who lives in castles)&gt; Castelunya &gt; Catalunya <br /> --[[Special:Contributions/79.159.194.238|79.159.194.238]] ([[User talk:79.159.194.238|talk]]) 17:11, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == What ''is'' a nation, anyway? ==<br /> <br /> If you seek the answer to this question in ordinary English dictionaries, you’ll find entries like this:<br /> <br /> :a large aggregate of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular country or territory ''(Oxford New American Dictionary)''<br /> or<br /> :... '''1''' a body of people associated with a particular territory, that is sufficiently conscious of its unity to seek or to possess a government peculiarly its own ''(Webster’s Encyclopedic Dictionary)''<br /> <br /> or<br /> <br /> :... '''2''' a community of persons not constituting a state but bound by common descent, language, history, etc. ''(Collins English Dictionary)''<br /> <br /> So are Wikipedia editors entitled to describe Catalonia as a nation? On the basis of the foregoing, clearly they are. And what about the Spanish Constitutional Court? Well, neither they nor any other institution or legislature have any business to dictate English usage. Many editors (particularly some who are not native English speakers) have failed to take account of this fact. When the term “nation” is used in the context of Catalonia’s legal status, we need to make it quite clear in what sense it’s being used.<br /> <br /> Let me hasten to add that the foregoing mustn’t be taken to imply that I’m supporting a Catalanist position here: that would be to fall into exactly the sort of confusion between linguistic usage and legal definition that I'm criticizing.<br /> <br /> [[User:AdeMiami|AdeMiami]] ([[User talk:AdeMiami|talk]]) 15:51, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Recent edit warring ==<br /> <br /> Look, this back and forth edit warring isn't really helping anything. You guys need to discuss it here. As an outsider with no stake in this, could I clarify a few points and ask people to follow them up below? There seem to be three main issues here -<br /> <br /> ===Nation/region/nationality etc in the lead, post court case===<br /> <br /> Per the above section, I don't think anyone can argue against the idea Catalonia is a &quot;nation&quot; in the broadest sense of the word - in the same way that is is also a &quot;region&quot;, and &quot;area&quot; or whatever, as well as more formally an &quot;Autonomous Community&quot;. The Spanish Constitutional Court ruling would also seem - according to the [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/spain/7861118/Catalonia-can-call-itself-a-nation-rules-Spains-top-court.html Telegraph piece] being cited - to have now more formally confirmed/accepted the use of the term &quot;nation&quot; in the latest Statute of Autonomy. However, it seems that they are saying that precisely because it is simply a vague cultural term that does not have a &quot;legal value&quot; or constitutional implications - ie it's accurate, but not that significant. The issue at stake is what to highlight and prioritise in the lead, and I'm not sure that simply sourcing to the Telegraph piece helps. That article also describes Catalonia as a &quot;region&quot;, and it's not clear on what basis one term is being preferred here over any other. It seems to me that using more formally defined terminology, where the terms wiki-link to pages about terms as they are used in a Spanish context - ie as in [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;oldid=371840349 this version] - would be better.<br /> <br /> :I don't think this formula would work, because the list of Spain's &quot;constituent historical nationalities&quot; has never been laid out and, in any event, it would open a can of worms. One million pounds for those who try (and succeed on) it: would Navarre be part of the Basque nation? Is there a constituent nationality called Castile? If that's so, would Andalusia be part of it (it was part of Castile's Crown, after all..)? Etc, etc.<br /> <br /> :Nor can we accept, as some editor has pretended, that all of Spain's autonomous regions are nationalities. Madrid is an autonomous region, but neither a nation nor a nationality. The same goes for, let's say, Extremadura, Cantabria or Murcia. I'm sorry for being so blunt on the matter, but some of Spain's autonomous regions are nations whereas others are just that: regions. And we all know who's who on this.<br /> <br /> :The points are: <br /> <br /> ::(a) Catalonia's Autonomy Charter describes it as a nation (whether this is legally binding is of no importance: this is Wikipedia, not a constitutionalists' forum). This term ('nation') was sanctioned by (a) Catalonia's Parliament, (b) Spain's Parliament and (c) Catalonia's people in a referendum.<br /> <br /> ::(b) Spain's Constitutional Court has sanctioned its use (again: whether this is legally binding is of no importance: this is Wikipedia, not a constitutionalists' forum). <br /> <br /> ::(c) Countless English-language sources (and this is ''English'' Wikipedia, by the way) describe Catalonia as a nation. Those sources (for instance, The Daily Telegraph) can't be accused of any sort of nationalist leaning. Quite the contrary, as the Irish experience shows to us.<br /> <br /> [[User:Andreas Balart|Andreas Balart]] ([[User talk:Andreas Balart|talk]]) 08:27, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Order of languages===<br /> <br /> Is there a formal, agreed view in the real world of which of Catalan and Spanish is the &quot;main&quot; language, eg by virtue of official recognition as such within Catalonia and/or Spain as a whole, or are there official figures that reveal one language is more commonly spoken as a first language in Catalonia than the other? If so, the order should just follow that. If not, or there's no clear answer on those criteria, how about going by alphabetical order, ie Catalan first (although it would be slightly odd to apply this across all languages and put Aranese right at the top)?<br /> <br /> ===Parliament===<br /> <br /> It seems kind of obvious to me that the Parliament field in the infobox should refer to the Catalan parliament and link to that page, not to the national Spanish parliament. See [[Scotland]] for example.<br /> <br /> Anyway, those are my thoughts, if they help. There's plenty else that needs improving with the rest of the article, and genuine vandalism seems to slip by unnoticed while all this gets edit warred over. --&lt;small&gt;'''[[User:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;navy&quot;&gt;N-HH&lt;/font&gt;]]''' '''[[User talk:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]/[[Special:Contributions/N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;edits&lt;/font&gt;]]'''&lt;/small&gt; 15:23, 5 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Dear '''N-HH''',<br /> <br /> :If anything this point demostrates the sort of people who've hijacked and taken over this article over the last months and years, masquerading their byass as ''consensus'': they were actually ''so'' byassed that they '''deleted any reference''' to Catalonia's Parliament on Catalonia's infobox. It beggars belief.<br /> <br /> :We can put it down to a whole set of prejudices. Otherwise, it is rather difficult to understand this behaviour.<br /> <br /> :For too many months, I've been watching over it. But enough is enough. <br /> <br /> :[[User:Andreas Balart|Andreas Balart]] ([[User talk:Andreas Balart|talk]]) 08:32, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Automate archiving? ==<br /> <br /> Does anyone object to me setting up automatic archiving for this page using MiszaBot? Unless otherwise agreed, I would set it to archive threads that have been inactive for 30 days and keep ten threads.--[[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] ([[User talk:Oneiros|talk]]) 20:43, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :{{done}}--[[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] ([[User talk:Oneiros|talk]]) 13:47, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Spain high court rules against &quot;nation&quot; term ==<br /> <br /> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100710/ap_on_re_eu/eu_spain_catalan_charter &lt;span style=&quot;font-size: smaller;&quot; class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/75.85.14.106|75.85.14.106]] ([[User talk:75.85.14.106|talk]]) 02:14, 11 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;!-- Template:UnsignedIP --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;<br /> <br /> :No credit shoud be paid to anonymous vandalist comments<br /> :[[User:Eva Grossjean|Eva Grossjean]] ([[User talk:Eva Grossjean|talk]]) 14:11, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> ::Wikipedia is about speaking from the facts, not only from part of the political POV or from the legal POV (legal but not moral as the decisions of Spanish Constitutional Court are more than discussed). Anyone at Catalonia knows a significant part of the people living there feels that part of Spain as a nation with right of self-governing and any source considered trustable should reflect that. Any editor not trusting this can search about the Catalan display on this 11th July and will see that spanish high court is simply applying a centralist POV. BR anonymous. [[Special:Contributions/95.61.18.160|95.61.18.160]] ([[User talk:95.61.18.160|talk]]) 19:00, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Catalonia is not a nation (at least legally) but a historical nationality. ==<br /> <br /> Spain's Constitutional Court accepts the definition as nation for Catalonia but has no legal value. For legal purposes is still considered a historical nationality and in any case should not be included within the framework of political status. Catalonia is only an autonomous region of Spain. &lt;small&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Arkarull|Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Arkarull|contribs]]) 13:54, 12 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/small&gt;&lt;!-- Template:Unsigned --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;<br /> <br /> <br /> :Spain's constitutional Court is not the only POV ,and obviously is an interested POV. It is internationally accepted that part of the Catalan population feels Catalonia as a nation. It is a case very similar to Quebec so no such debate makes sense. The spanish constituional court is just an interested part in the conflict.[[Special:Contributions/95.61.18.160|95.61.18.160]] ([[User talk:95.61.18.160|talk]]) 19:03, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::For an encyclopedia the only valid POV is the legal POV, and in Spain the Constituctional Court's decissions are definitives. If Wikipedia doesn't respect that, a lot of other articles must be corrected. Scotland, for example, is only a historical country of United Kingdom or is a nation? I am Spanish but I respect the Catalan nationalism, as it has perfect historical foundations, and I think they are a nation, of course, but include social or personal POV in a section intended to the political situation, whatever it is, for better or for worse, is not encyclopedic. [[Special:Contributions/Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]]) 12:00, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Arkarull, the decission about nation/nationality is not any personal POV but it's sufficently backed up by legal texts. The Constitutional Court has ruled that the term 'nation' ''stands'' on Catalonia's autonomy charter's preamble, which, by the way, doubles as an organical law of the Spanish State (ie. passed by both Congress and Senate). <br /> <br /> :Whether or not this has legal consequences (it has not, according to the Court) is of no importance to Wikipedia. The point here is that the law (Spanish as well as Catalan) '''describes''' Catalonia as a nation. And all we do here in WP is to describe things.<br /> <br /> :Now: the Spanish Constitution does also acknowlege that Spain is made up of regions and nationalities. The fact that no list has been made as to which territories qualify as regions and which ones as nationalities doesn't mean that we ''all'' know who's who here: Is Catalonia a nationality? For sure. Is La Rioja a nationality? Of course not.<br /> <br /> :Finally, once we've accepted the 'nationality' terms as experessed in the Spanish Constitution, a purely linguistic point kicks into: 'nationality' implies the existence of a 'nation'. As Wikipedia states:<br /> <br /> ::Nationality is membership of a nation ''or'' sovereign state. Nationality can be acquired by being born within the jurisdiction of a state, by inheriting it from parents, or by a process of naturalization. ...<br /> ::en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationality<br /> <br /> :Therefore, if we accept the Constitutional existence of nationalities, it automatically derives in the existence of nations.<br /> <br /> [[User:Eva Grossjean|Eva Grossjean]] ([[User talk:Eva Grossjean|talk]]) 11:36, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::Ok, Eva, we both agree in that for us Catalonia is a Nation. But I think thar for legal purposes is not a clear idea:<br /> :::'''''Artículo 2 de la Constitución Española''': La Constitución se fundamenta en la indisoluble unidad de la Nación española, patria común e indivisible de todos los españoles, y reconoce y garantiza el derecho a la autonomía de las nacionalidades y regiones que la integran y la solidaridad entre todas ellas''. ('''Article 2 of the Spanish Constitution''': The Constitution is based on the indissoluble unity of the Spanish Nation, common and indivisible homeland of all Spanish, and recognizes and guarantees the right to autonomy of nationalities and regions which comprise and solidarity among them.)<br /> ::Therefore, the Constitution accepts the existence of &quot;nationalities&quot;, but aggregated into a single Nation, the Spanish. As a result, the Constitutional Court ruled that the designation as a nation that does the Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia (2006) in its preamble has no legal validity. Wikipedia's article for''nationality''not worth me because, as one librarian of this encyclopedia said to me once, Wikipedia is not Wikipedia's reference.<br /> ::In any case, this debate is sterile because the article has already been corrected by someone, replacing &quot;nation&quot; with &quot;nationality.&quot; &lt;small&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Arkarull|Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Arkarull|contribs]]) 17:47, 13 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/small&gt;&lt;!-- Template:Unsigned --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;<br /> <br /> <br /> Nations are not defined solely by Constitutions, mon cher Arkarull.<br /> <br /> If that was the case, the USA could never be considered a nation, since a definition of the United States as a nation is nowhere to be seen in there. And yet, they are a nation--and what a nation, by the way!<br /> <br /> Britain, on the other hand, does not even have a written Constitution to back her nationhood. And yet, it is another nation.<br /> <br /> As I wrote before in this forum, some people mix 'statehood' with 'nationhood'. Gross mistake: sometimes they might coincide, but some other times they might not.<br /> <br /> This legalistic insistence on the Spanish Constitution demonstrates, if anything, a large degree of intellectual laziness.<br /> <br /> xxx<br /> [[Special:Contributions/81.39.12.15|81.39.12.15]] ([[User talk:81.39.12.15|talk]]) 16:21, 14 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Absolutely, my condescending friend, but I guess you'll understand that I defends the rights of a country, in this case mine, to be judge by its own rules. So, as you agree that in Spain some territories are called Autonomous Comunities, while in USA they call States as well as relevant laws stipulate, when their functions are almost identical, we can also accept that the political and legal definitions are framed in Spanish constitutional frameworks that set Spanish as the only Nation, not excluding the existence of nationalities. You can consider this stupid, centralist or incoherent, but it is what it is. And it is says by one of the few Spanish, born in Madrid, who consider Catalonia a nation. But I also differentiate between what I think and what is legally OK, that's what fits in this discussion. And I differentiate clearly between state and nation, thanks.<br /> Furthermore, I believe that you can defend yours opinions without resorting to insult.<br /> And sorry for my poor English. It's probably my &quot;large degree of intellectual laziness&quot;.</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Line_of_Control&diff=373427966 2010-07-14T11:48:35Z

<p>Arkarull: /* This article is now disponible in spanish */ new section</p> <hr /> <div>{{WP India<br /> |class=start<br /> |importance=<br /> }}<br /> {{WPMILHIST|class=start|Indian=yes|Pakistani=yes<br /> &lt;!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --&gt;<br /> |B-Class-1=no<br /> &lt;!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --&gt;<br /> |B-Class-2=no<br /> &lt;!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --&gt;<br /> |B-Class-3=yes<br /> &lt;!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --&gt;<br /> |B-Class-4=yes<br /> &lt;!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --&gt;<br /> |B-Class-5=yes<br /> }}<br /> <br /> <br /> ==Untitled==<br /> The title of this article is an example of the fanatic tendency not to use uppercase (capital) letters. The title is an official designation for a specific thing and needs to be in title case.[[User:IFaqeer|&lt;nowiki&gt;&lt;/nowiki&gt;]]&amp;mdash;[[User:IFaqeer|iFaqeer]] [[User talk:IFaqeer|(Talk to me!)]] 06:57, May 23, 2005 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Also, does someone want to make a page on the popular Indian movie Line of Control?<br /> <br /> &quot;territories controlled by two militaries&quot; What is that about? [[User:deeptrivia|deeptrivia]] ([[User talk:deeptrivia|talk]]) 16:17, 17 June 2006 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==December 2006: Latest comments of Pakistan over Kashmir '''“The Kashmir puzzle”'''==<br /> <br /> '''&quot;The Kashmir puzzle&quot;'''<br /> <br /> '''THE HINDU'''<br /> <br /> '''Online edition of India's National Newspaper'''<br /> <br /> '''Thursday, Dec 14, 2006'''<br /> <br /> '''Opinion - Letters to the Editor''' <br /> <br /> <br /> This refers to the editorial &quot;Clues to Kashmir peace puzzle&quot; (Dec. 13). Pakistan Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Tasnim Aslam's statement that her country has never claimed Kashmir as an integral part of its territory is a pleasant surprise. She has buttressed her assertion, saying Pakistan-held Kashmir has its own president and prime minister. It is clear that there is a paradigm shift in Pakistan's stand on Kashmir. If it indeed has no territorial design in Kashmir, it should leave the issue to the Kashmiris and stop fighting on their behalf. <br /> K.V. Seetharamaiah, <br /> Hassan <br /> <br /> <br /> Ms. Aslam's remarks vindicate New Delhi's stand that Kashmir is an integral part of India. One feels that the latest statements by President Pervez Musharraf and his Government are effective catalysts for a change. <br /> K.S. Thampi, <br /> Chennai <br /> <br /> <br /> By stating openly that it has never claimed Kashmir as its integral part, Pakistan has only reiterated the legal position. The Indian Independence Act 1947 gave the princely states the right to choose between India and Pakistan. Jammu and Kashmir became an irrevocable part of India once Hari Singh signed the Instrument of Accession to India. <br /> It is an open secret that Pakistan's relations with India have been closely linked to its fixation on Kashmir. When all is said and done, Pakistan's latest statement is welcome, as it is likely to take the neighbours closer to solving the peace puzzle. <br /> A. Paramesham, <br /> New Delhi <br /> <br /> <br /> A week ago, Gen. Musharraf said Pakistan was willing to give up its claim to Kashmir if India accepted his &quot;four-point solution.&quot; Why should he offer to give up the claim over something his country never claimed in the first place, using a non-existent thing to negotiate? &quot;Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practise to deceive!&quot; (Sir Walter Scott, Marmion) <br /> S.P. Sundaram, <br /> Chennai <br /> <br /> http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2006/12/05/pakistan-kashmir.html?ref=rss <br /> <br /> <br /> Now that Gen. Musharraf has clarified Pakistan's stand on Kashmir, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh should seize the opportunity to settle the issue once and for all. The BJP should not be a stumbling block to the negotiations. <br /> M.N. Srinivasan, <br /> Vellore <br /> <br /> <br /> Statements emanating from Pakistan are intended to pressure India in two ways. While they will invoke the wrath of those who favour self-rule for Kashmir, India will be forced to negotiate the Kashmir issue more seriously on bilateral and multilateral forums. The Government should respond with a strong message. <br /> Rajeev Ranjan Dwivedi, <br /> Dhenkanal, Orissa <br /> <br /> <br /> Pakistan's latest statement is superficial and bears no significance. It should not be seen as a shift in its Kashmir policy. It is an attempt to mislead the world until the tide turns in Gen. Musharraf's favour. With India set to sign a nuclear deal with the U.S., Pakistan wants to gain some ground and win credibility in American circles. Had Gen. Musharraf really believed that the people of Kashmir should decide their fate, he would have ended cross-border terror by now. <br /> Shashikant Singh, <br /> Roorkee <br /> <br /> '''Source: The Hindu<br /> Date:14/12/2006 URL: http://www.thehindu.com/2006/12/14/stories/2006121404131000.htm<br /> ''' <br /> <br /> [[User:Atulsnischal|Atulsnischal]] 12:34, 15 December 2006 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==Fair use rationale for Image:Kargil.jpg==<br /> [[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|70px|left]]<br /> '''[[:Image:Kargil.jpg]]''' is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under [[Wikipedia:Fair use|fair use]] but there is no [[Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline|explanation or rationale]] as to why its use in '''this''' Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the [[Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/Fair use|boilerplate fair use template]], you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with [[WP:FU|fair use]].<br /> <br /> Please go to [[:Image:Kargil.jpg|the image description page]] and edit it to include a [[Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline |fair use rationale]]. Using one of the templates at [[Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline]] is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.<br /> <br /> If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Images.2FMedia|criteria for speedy deletion]]. If you have any questions please ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|Media copyright questions page]]. Thank you.&lt;!-- Template:Missing rationale2 --&gt;<br /> <br /> [[User:BetacommandBot|BetacommandBot]] ([[User talk:BetacommandBot|talk]]) 22:20, 13 February 2008 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==Fair use rationale for Image:Kashmir treaty.jpg==<br /> [[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|70px|left]]<br /> '''[[:Image:Kashmir treaty.jpg]]''' is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under [[Wikipedia:Fair use|fair use]] but there is no [[Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline|explanation or rationale]] as to why its use in '''this''' Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the [[Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/Fair use|boilerplate fair use template]], you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with [[WP:FU|fair use]].<br /> <br /> Please go to [[:Image:Kashmir treaty.jpg|the image description page]] and edit it to include a [[Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline |fair use rationale]]. Using one of the templates at [[Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline]] is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.<br /> <br /> If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Images.2FMedia|criteria for speedy deletion]]. If you have any questions please ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|Media copyright questions page]]. Thank you.&lt;!-- Template:Missing rationale2 --&gt;<br /> <br /> [[User:BetacommandBot|BetacommandBot]] ([[User talk:BetacommandBot|talk]]) 23:39, 13 February 2008 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ==Image copyright problem with Image:Kashmir-Accession-Document-a.jpg==<br /> The image [[:Image:Kashmir-Accession-Document-a.jpg]] is used in this article under a claim of [[WP:NFC|fair use]], but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the [[WP:NFCC|requirements for such images]] when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an [[Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline|explanation]] linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check<br /> <br /> :* That there is a [[Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline|non-free use rationale]] on the image's description page for the use in this article.<br /> :* That this article is linked to from the image description page.<br /> The following images also have this problem:<br /> &lt;!-- Additional 10c images go here --&gt;<br /> *[[: Image:Kashmir-Accession-Document-b.jpg]]<br /> <br /> This is an automated notice by [[User:FairuseBot|FairuseBot]]. For assistance on the image use policy, see [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions]]. --01:10, 18 September 2008 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == &quot;India took a historical beating by the hands of the Pakistani army.&quot; Misleading and uncited information. ==<br /> <br /> Under the section of &quot;Kashmir Wars : Indo-Pakistani war of 1965&quot;, information, &quot;India took a historical beating by the hands of the Pakistani army.&quot;, is misleading. I request any senior editor to edit the following line according to neutral views. If citation is needed you might even refer to the main page of the &quot;Indo-Pakistani War of 1965&quot;, which claims a neutral result of war. I would suggest the immediate removal of the line. &lt;small&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Kursworld|Kursworld]] ([[User talk:Kursworld|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Kursworld|contribs]]) 07:36, 3 March 2009 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/small&gt;&lt;!-- Template:Unsigned --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;<br /> <br /> == This article is now disponible in spanish ==<br /> <br /> Please, add a link to this article in spanish Wikipedia.</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Catalonia&diff=373295193 2010-07-13T17:50:08Z

<p>Arkarull: /* Catalonia is not a nation (at least legally) but a historical nationality. */</p> <hr /> <div>{{Skip to talk}}<br /> {{Talk header|search=yes}}<br /> {{Off topic warning}}<br /> {{Controversial3}}<br /> {{WikiProject Spain|class=c|importance=top}}<br /> {{WikiProject Catalan-speaker|class=c|importance=top}}<br /> {{OnThisDay|date1=2004-09-11|oldid1=9955831}}<br /> {{auto archiving notice|bot=MiszaBot|age=30|dounreplied=yes}}<br /> {{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn<br /> |target=Talk:Catalonia/Archive index<br /> |mask=Talk:Catalonia/Archive &lt;#&gt;<br /> |leading_zeros=0<br /> |indexhere=yes}}<br /> {{User:MiszaBot/config<br /> |archiveheader = {{aan}}<br /> |maxarchivesize = 200K<br /> |counter = 5<br /> |minthreadsleft = 10<br /> |minthreadstoarchive = 1<br /> |algo = old(30d)<br /> |archive = Talk:Catalonia/Archive %(counter)d<br /> }}<br /> <br /> == Catalonia definition must me corrected ==<br /> <br /> We must differentiate between geographic and politics definition.<br /> Catalonia is a geographical area comprising actual Catalan Community in Spain and Cerdanya which actually is the french department of Pyrinèes Oriental. If there is any reference to Catalonia as a nation, it must cover all Catalonia and not merely the Catalan Community of Spain.<br /> Both populations consider theirselves Catalans sharing the same Catalan language, (even it is not considered an official language in France because political assumptions) whith respect for each political nationality, french or spanish. <br /> <br /> The definition must be considered as follows:<br /> <br /> ''Catalonia Community covers an area of 32,114 km² and has an official population of 7,210,508[1]. It borders Cerdanya in France and Andorra to the north, Aragon to the west, the Valencian Community to the south, and the Mediterranean Sea to the east (580 km coastline). Official languages are Catalan, Spanish and Aranese.''<br /> <br /> I understand that the separatist ideas of some french and spanish nationalism against the European Union cultural heritage must be erradicated if we want the wikipedia project to progress.<br /> <br /> :I'm sorry but I must disagree with you. There is another concept for the whole catalan-speaking territories and it is [[Catalan Countries]].<br /> :Catalonia's definition is being discussed in the section above (for a long time).--[[User:Civit cardona|Civit cardona]] ([[User talk:Civit cardona|talk]]) 14:04, 15 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> I struggle to believe that Perpignan in France should only be counted as &quot;Catalan speaking&quot;. They fly the Catalan flag, it's historically and cultural strongly Catalan, and the Rugby League team (which should also be mentioned and linked in the article) is called Catalan Dragons. In Catalan the area is called Northern Catalonia. <br /> <br /> I'm sure this is a controversial issue whatever is included in the article, but ignoring Northern Catalonia in the article completely strikes me as a whitewash and not a neutral POV. [[User:Davini994|Davini994]] ([[User talk:Davini994|talk]]) 10:22, 3 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :This article is hijacked by some editors near to spanish unionist positions. I do agree with you that not speaking about the Catalan nation and what and where is North Catalonia is simply a failure of reflecting the Catalan reality. If the article is only speaking about the autonomous community then it should be called 'Autonomous Community of Catalonia'[[Special:Contributions/95.61.18.160|95.61.18.160]] ([[User talk:95.61.18.160|talk]]) 19:09, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Flag of Catalonia ==<br /> <br /> I think that there are some problems with that sentence: &quot;The flag of Catalonia or ''[[Senyera]]'' (''flag'' in [[Catalan language|Catalan]]), is a [[vexillological symbol]] based on the [[coat of arms]] of the [[Crown of Aragon]], which consists of four red stripes on a golden background. It is an official symbol since the Statute of Catalonia of 1932.&quot; The flag was an heraldic emblem of Counts of Barcelona before being in the Crown of Aragon.--[[User:Vilarrubla|Vilar]] 22:48, 19 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Since both claims are correct, next time, instead than removing a correct fact from an article (i.e: &quot;based on the [[coat of arms]] of the [[Crown of Aragon]]&quot;), you should, if willing to add your POV, limit yourself to add to that sentence a &quot;and of the counts of barcelona&quot; instead than erasing the content (which is also fully referenced). --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 01:18, 20 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> ::I have not erased anything and that was not fully referenced. The reference #46 says: &quot;The flag of Catalonia, which is the traditional flag with four red stripes on a yellow background, shall be present on public buildings and during official acts held in Catalonia.&quot; and I don't see anything about Crown of Aragon or Counts of Barcelona in that reference. --[[User:Vilarrubla|Vilar]] 10:45, 20 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == The map ==<br /> <br /> Carles, noticing your last [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=302485241&amp;oldid=302474758 edit], I just want to point you that each and every other article about CCAA has the vectorial map (just take a look yourself). If we want to keep some equality and sense around wikipedia, the correct thing is to leave the other one. there is no real reasons for this article to be the exemption. My thoughts only. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 22:40, 16 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Sorry, Maurice, I beg to disagree. At least the maps for the Valencian Community and the Balearic Islands have also been changed today (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Valencian_Community&amp;diff=302475380&amp;oldid=302426446] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Balearic_Islands&amp;diff=302472767&amp;oldid=302008420]) to this kind of Spain-centered map. So the situation is not like you seem to describe: the map in Catalonia article being a unique strange singularity to be corrected with respect to a long well-established tradition in all the remaining communities. No. The fact is that just now some people propose this new solution. We can discuss it, of course. My initial point is that I prefer the maps those communities have had for a long time because they are more globally-minded and show their position not only inside Spain, but also in a European context. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 23:09, 16 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::Sadly, like so many other times, it is not a point of what we do prefer, but to continue the path followed by the majority of the other articles. Let's not forget that this article is part of an encyclopedia, and as such, all related articles must follow the same guidelines. If you take a look at all the articles about CCAA. Like it or not, the vectorial map seems to be the prefered by all the editors involved in the majority of all those articles. If you take a look at the portuguese districts([[Braga (district)]], [[Bragança (district)]], [[Faro (district)]], [[Lisboa (district)]]...), the french regions ([[Alsace]], [[Champagne-Ardenne]], [Bourgogne]], [[Nord-Pas-de-Calais]], [[Pays de la Loire]], [[Rhône-Alpes]]...) or the italian italian regions ([[Abruzzo]], [[Calabria]], [[Lazio]], [[Marche]], [[Sardinia]], [[Tuscany]]...), you will notice that they all do share the same maps and that are always &quot;country-centered&quot; (if I may say so). Having different types of maps depending on the region selected is in my opinion undesirable.<br /> <br /> ::That said, I believe that the correct thing is to implement the map used by the majority of the articles CCAA-related. In addition, let's not forget that this is this the english wikipedia, and as such, it is like the &quot;international version&quot; of it. If some user from Indonesia wants to learn about a CCAA (let's say Catalonia in this particular case) you can bet for sure he might be much more interested to understand where it is placed in relation to the rest of the country than in relation to Europe.<br /> <br /> ::I think that those are the 2 most important reasons to keep the vectorial map. If someday, Europe really becomes something close enough to a united country, then your position of an europen-minded map should be the one to follow... But only if that is the position for all the articles in wikipedia related to europen regions... Cheers. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 17:45, 17 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::Thanks for your explanation, Maurice, and sorry for my late reply (I am back from holidays just now). I agree with you that homogeneity is good in general, but I'm still not sure whether it constitutes a sufficient reason for the change you propose. I haven't seen any wiki policy enforcing this uniformity, although I agree with you that it is desirable. But, actually, there would be a way to make both of us happy, i.e. to preserve both good properties at once (global-minded maps and homogeneity): uploading maps like those we had during the last years for the Catalan-speaking communities also for the remaining Spanish autonomous communities, right? This is my proposal. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 08:51, 19 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::::I thought you were on vacations... Hope you enjoyed them! I don't mind your proposal but, do you know how to create maps? Because I don't. If nobody uploads those maps for the rest of the CCAA, we get back to start. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 09:49, 19 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::Yes, I've enjoyed them a lot, thanks! :) Good to see that you are open to a proposal that would solve both of our concern at once. As regards to the maps, this seems to completely feasible. I am checking that those files already exist: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Andaluc%C3%ADa.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Extremadura.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Castilla-La_Mancha.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Castilla_y_Le%C3%B3n.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_la_Comunidad_de_Madrid.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Galicia.png], etc. (you see the pattern). So homogeneity is not really a problem. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 10:34, 20 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Hi there Carles. Long time no see. <br /> <br /> I wanted to make you reconsider your position about keeping the european centered maps. For almost one year(?), you have been defending those maps against (quite a lot now) changes by multiple editors to the one used in the rest of CCAA related articles. We already discussed this matter long time ago (uniformity in wikipedia articles, the country being more important than the continent...).<br /> <br /> You know I don't agree with your position, but for the sake of both of us I left your option. But now, you should admit that your opinion is probably a minority.<br /> <br /> Tell me what you think. Cheers. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 10:05, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi Maurice! Nice to meet you here again. Hope you're doing fine.<br /> :I don't completely agree with your analysis of the situation. First, those maps are not my invention. They were already in stable versions of the entries when I joined the project, more than two years ago. Second, after a quick check on the history of the entry on [[Catalonia]], I've counted only four users changing the map to the Spanish-centered one since we discussed the issue. And none of them, unlike you, has bothered to write a single line on the talk page to state their points for the change. On the other hand, there has been one user who has proposed a [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mapa_de_localitzaci%C3%B3_a_les_comarques_catalanes.svg Catalan-centered map] which, coherently with my globally-minded approach, I don't like and I don't support. Therefore, I don't think that &quot;lonely Carles fighting against a majority of users who argue for a Spain-centered map&quot; is a faithful account of the situation, because they are few, they hardly argue, and there have even been proposals in a different direction. In this discussion, we made our positions quite clear. Let me remind my points:<br /> :* The main thing here is to offer an accurate map (faithful to both geographical and political reality) and as informative as possible to help readers from all over the world to locate these regions.<br /> :* In particular, the maps should clearly show the administrative borders of the autonomous communities, their position inside Spain (for they belong to this sovereign state, and nowadays sovereign states are the key element in geopolitical divisions), and their position in a wider context to give the maximum information to non-European readers. All of this can be achieved with the pictures I've been defending.<br /> :* Homogeneity with entries about other regions is certainly a good value to pursue and, as I already showed, it does not contradict any point above, because we already have in Commons maps of this kind (showing both Spanish and European context) for all the remaining Spanish regions.<br /> :--[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera#top|talk]]) 11:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Carles, all the autonomies of Spain have the same map. I understand that you are independentist but this it is not motive for including a map where you cannot see the whole country. I am sorry, but it isn't logical to include a map different to the rest. [[User:Diplomatiko|Diplomatiko]] ([[User talk:Diplomatiko|talk]]) 14:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi, Diplomatiko. Many thanks for joining the discussion. I would like to kindly ask you a couple of things. First, it would help the discussion a lot, if you would read carefully what has been said so far. In particular, you'll find a specific proposal dealing with the uniformity problem you are concerned with. Second, I would appreciate it very much if you would abstain from making assumptions on other users personal views. It doesn't really help the discussion (after all, personal opinions of the editors do not matter much when we are trying to produce a neutral text), and sometimes (this is the case now) you can be misled to wrong conclusions: I am not an independentist (not even a nationalist), as it can be easily seen in the userboxes in my webpage. Anyway, we can forget about this, because talk pages are not meant to discuss about any user, but about the article in question and to decide how to collectively improve it. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 14:50, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :I see you are taking your time to think about it. Fair enough. In the meantime, I shall restore the previous consensual map. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 10:19, 25 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> I'm restoring the regular map (the one which all the other articles use). There's no reason to use another map: NUTS maps don't offer an enough clear sight of a country subdivision location. Furthermore, this (and sometimes the Valencian Community one, for obvious reasons...) is the only country subdivision article in the entire Wikipedia where they're used. [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 21:01, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi Icallbs. Thanks for your comments. But, have you bothered to read the discussion above where I showed that your concerns on homogeneity in Spanish regions entries are compatible with my concerns for globality for non-Spanish readers? Please take a look at it. On the other hand, let me remind that prior to changing a disputed content, you should reach consensus, not the other way around as you have done know (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus#Consensus-building]). Cheers, --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:51, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Maybe you misunderstood &quot;NUTS&quot;. [[NUTS of Spain|These]] are the Spanish NUTS regions, in which the map you use is based. <br /> <br /> :: I've read that discussion, and I must say those maps aren't suitable at all in this kind of articles. They just aren't, just have a look at France's subdivisions articles, or Italy's, or Portugal's, or Poland's. Sadly, I think those &quot;concerns&quot; aren't really &quot;for globality&quot;. Exaxtly because non-Spanish users are the ones who will be reading this, they'll the ones the maps should be adressed to. I encourage you to read the consesus-building article you pointed before for the further seeking of a common point. Other users like MauritiusXIII can help us improving these aspects too. In the meantime, probably the regular map is the better option because of the homogeneity. Also, I'd like you to consider Dr01drpny's option, it's the same map as the rest of Spain's regions and it has the globality element.<br /> <br /> :: [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 18:45, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi. I combined both maps to try to fulfill both concerns regarding homogeneity and wider region location inside Europe. You can add it to the article if you agree with it: [[:File:Localització de Catalunya.png]]. Cheers. --[[User:Dr01drpny|Dr01drpny]] ([[User talk:Dr01drpny|talk]]) 23:45, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi there. Thank you very much, Dr01drpny, for your input. That moves towards the good direction to resolve the dispute, indeed. As for Icallbs, first let me say I'm sorry for having misunderstood the &quot;NUTS&quot; thing; I didn't know that concept. Thank you for pointing it out. However, you might want to apologize as well for assuming bad faith in me when you write &quot;I think those concerns aren't really for globality&quot;. I am proud to claim that all my contributions to Wikipedia (both in articles and in talk pages) are openly honest and faithful to my points of view; it would certainly be stupid to act otherwise when I am editing under my real name. So, this frank globality concern is starting to be addressed by Dr01drpny in his proposal, and I have tentatively tried how it looks in the article. I would like to ask him, since he looks very deft in map creation, to propose some other solutions which could make the European map bigger (now it is too hard to see). An easy solution is to increase the box on the right-bottom corner (there is some space on the sea and Africa that could be covered without problems). A better one would be to create something analogous to the maps used in [[Scotland]], [[Wales]] or [[England]], where the European map is the main one while the whole state (the UK in this case) is also shown in the box, which seems to be something of the highest importance to some users. After seeing (some of) these possibilities we could decide which is the nicest and most suitable for these articles. Needless to say, to satisfy the urge for homogeneity in Spanish autonomous communities articles, the new kind of map will have to be produced for each of them. Looking forward to hearing from all of you, --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:31, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Hi there. I agree with the idea of having a wider (Europe / World) localization map, especially for people from other countries. Still, there are some users who want homogeneity with the maps of all the other regions of Spain. Creating a new version of all these maps is a notable effort, and it would require a deeper consensus (currently the map is being changed almost every day). Maybe something to talk about in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Spain | WikiProject Spain]]. In the meanwhile I uploaded an updated version of the file with a bigger Europe map as Cnoguera asked. You can see the preview [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 | here]. --[[User:Dr01drpny|Dr01drpny]] ([[User talk:Dr01drpny|talk]]) 23:34, 6 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi, thanks again for you valuable help. That one is better indeed, but I still think that something like the UK maps would be even better (both having a clear depiction of the whole state administrative structure, as required by Maurice and Icallbs, and nice big global maps for a globally-minded English encyclopedia as seen e.g. in the UK entries). I suggest to explore that possibility before taking any decision. I understand the non-trivial effort the whole thing requires (and I truly thank you for your excellent technical help), but there certainly are strong concerns about homogeneity by several users, as you can see in the discussion above. As far as I am concerned, as a member of the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Catalan-speaking_Countries]], at least I'll work to have a uniform solution for the three articles under its scope. Sadly enough, while we are fruitfully discussing the issue here, some users like [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/79.153.124.250 this anonymous IP] keep trying to impose their point of view without bothering to contribute to the consensus building. I've already warned him about it. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:38, 7 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :However, if it is too difficult to produce these alternative maps, I suggest to go for the easiest solution and stick to the good old NUTS maps. Moreover there seems to be [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Basque_Country_%28autonomous_community%29#Edit_war_around_locator_map agreement on that elsewhere].--[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 15:27, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: That example doesn't suits our particular case... The country-centered map in that example just sucks! Portugal and France don't even appear. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 19:04, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Oh, yes. You're right, now I see it. I assumed, reasonably, that this discussion in [[Talk:Basque Country (autonomous community)]] was analogous to ours because there actually was an identical edit war proposing the same kind of map. But now I see that the discussion is strangely ignoring that one and proposing an ugly Spain-centered map where the country looks like an island... --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 19:46, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Like an island? Have you seen the German, French, Italian, Portuguese, or basically any other country subdivision article other than the British ones to use world maps for locating a region? It's stupid! Furthermore, the current map shows Portugal, the French border and even North Africa, which is much more than many (probably more than any other but the UK's constituent COUNTRIES [see what I did there?] articles). In the discussion you pointed at, there were only two votes... That's not a &quot;long-standing consensus&quot; nor it shows a reasonable solution. I'm sorry if I've been a bit rough in this comment, but these attempts to vandalize Wikipedia (specially the English one, cause it's the one millions of people from all countries, even non-English, read), trying to mislead them make me really upset. [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 20:34, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Yes, Icallbs, now you look upset indeed. Now you start referring to the proposals you don't like as &quot;stupid&quot; and to their defense as &quot;attempts to vandalize Wikipedia&quot; and &quot;trying to mislead&quot;... You know? it's a bad sign when one needs to use derogative terms to undermine the opponent's position in the discussion. But if you count to ten, take a deep breath, sit back and then read carefully the stuff above again, you'll realize what's written isn't that stupid after all. First, you'll see that the Spain-centered map where the country looks like an island I was referring to is, in fact, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_Comunidad_Vasca.png this one], and the island metaphor was already used in [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Basque_Country_(autonomous_community)#Edit_war_around_locator_map that discussion]. Second, you'll see I only attracted your attention to the Basque Country thing becauses it does resemble the discussion we currently having here, so it might be relevant. Third, you'll see I never described as a &quot;long-standing consensus&quot; what they have there, but I only said that &quot;there SEEMS to be an agreement&quot; there (and it really looks like that, when nobody has expressed any opinion against the NUTS map in that discussion thread; interestingly not even yourself after [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Basque_Country_(autonomous_community)&amp;diff=348810628&amp;oldid=348794880 you added the map you want]).<br /> :The discussion here is certainly far from being over. We are still waiting for new options from Dr01drpny or any other user able to produce them. So I wasn't restoring the NUTS maps (and BTW those are the really long-standing ones as a matter of fact in the Valencian Community, Balearic Islands and Catalonia entries) because of an alleged achievement of a new consensus. I was doing it because otherwise, when the map you like is there, some people seem to completely forget about the discussion and disappear for days. Interestingly enough, they suddenly come back when I restore the previous solution (sometimes yourself, sometimes some mysterious IPs which give little to none explanation for their edits). And, symmetrically, I could as well object that your putting back there the state-centered map is not fair before a decision is reached. But I won't, because my intention is already fulfilled by having people interested again in the discussion, which is the main issue here. Let us proceed then. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 09:51, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> * Please, don't mess this discussion here with the rest of the Autonomous Communities'. IF and only IF there is a general Wikipedia guideline regarding this issue, you can discuss other articles. Otherwise, keep it as a per article discussion and don't change other articles in which you are NOT involved, as the BAC one. We had our own discussion there and reached our own consensus. BTW, I don't get the &quot;goodness&quot; of that island-like map. It's geographical projection is not adequate for representing Spain, nor it does represent accurate detailed maps for each AC, as the green ones do. And again, these maps were replaced recently by anonymous users, probably to match them with the maps used in the Spanish Wiki, that may be are not the most accurate ones, you know. [[User:Deibid|David]] ([[User talk:Deibid|talk]]) 14:49, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: It is that &quot;IF&quot; precisely which I've been looking for weeks! Can't find anything... but I'm sure there is a guideline for these cases. If we find a guideline, we got the solution... I've tried quite a few wikiprojects but nothing... Any ideas, anyone? --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 19:47, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::As an outside observer who has occasionally reverted the wilder changes here ... I get confused exactly which map is which now, but FWIW I think the map should be clear in showing both where Catalonia is within Spain, and also where it is in the context of the wider European area. I'm not sure [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;oldid=352701357 this] version - the current one as I write - does that. It's too close-up, in the main part. I personally prefer the one [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 here], which I think was put together more recently. If you look for example at ones in respect of the UK, eg for [[Wales]] or [[Scotland]], they're even more &quot;global&quot; in perspective. In addition, there should ultimately be consistency across all the Spanish region/nation articles. &lt;small&gt;'''[[User:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;navy&quot;&gt;N-HH&lt;/font&gt;]]''' '''[[User talk:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]/[[Special:Contributions/N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;edits&lt;/font&gt;]]'''&lt;/small&gt; 14:56, 29 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 this version] is clearly the most desirable one. It has what all of us find important on a map. But we do lack of all the other maps for the rest of the Autonomous Communities. If someone knows how to add the small european map on the rest of them (and willing to), the problem is solved. I already tried to some days ago, but to manipulate svg's is beyond my comprehension... ;) --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 07:40, 30 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Catalan vs. Catalonian ==<br /> <br /> Most of the article uses the word &quot;Catalan&quot; as an English demonym adjective in almost all cases. The article even states in the infobox itself that the English demonym is &quot;Catalan&quot;. However, the section on popular culture uses the demonym &quot;Catalonian&quot;. Which is correct, if any? Either the references to &quot;Catalonian&quot; need to be changed to &quot;Catalan&quot; or, alternatively, &quot;Catalonian&quot; should be recognised as a possible demonym. [[User:Madeinsane|Madeinsane]] ([[User talk:Madeinsane|talk]]) 18:57, 13 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> You're right. 'Catalonian' is incorrect, or at least not as correct as 'Catalan'. I've removed the former from the article. That said, the entire section on popular culture needs clearing up. It is very badly written and might also be split to a new page. Any thoughts? --[[User:Tomclarke|Tomclarke]] ([[User talk:Tomclarke|talk]]) 15:15, 20 October 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Goth-Alania &gt; Catalonia ==<br /> <br /> &quot;...the name of the Spanish province Catalonia, which is but a slight deformation of Goth-Alania, &quot;province of the Goths and Alans&quot;...&quot; (from ''Alans'', Encyclopaedia Iranica) http://www.iranica.com/newsite/index.isc?Article=http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/unicode/v1f8/v1f8a013.html [[User:Böri|Böri]] ([[User talk:Böri|talk]]) 14:12, 25 December 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> --This is not true at all, just a fantasy theory, the name Catalonia probably comes from Gothalunda/Gothland &gt; Catalunya or from Castelans(people who lives in castles)&gt; Castelunya &gt; Catalunya <br /> --[[Special:Contributions/79.159.194.238|79.159.194.238]] ([[User talk:79.159.194.238|talk]]) 17:11, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == What ''is'' a nation, anyway? ==<br /> <br /> If you seek the answer to this question in ordinary English dictionaries, you’ll find entries like this:<br /> <br /> :a large aggregate of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular country or territory ''(Oxford New American Dictionary)''<br /> or<br /> :... '''1''' a body of people associated with a particular territory, that is sufficiently conscious of its unity to seek or to possess a government peculiarly its own ''(Webster’s Encyclopedic Dictionary)''<br /> <br /> or<br /> <br /> :... '''2''' a community of persons not constituting a state but bound by common descent, language, history, etc. ''(Collins English Dictionary)''<br /> <br /> So are Wikipedia editors entitled to describe Catalonia as a nation? On the basis of the foregoing, clearly they are. And what about the Spanish Constitutional Court? Well, neither they nor any other institution or legislature have any business to dictate English usage. Many editors (particularly some who are not native English speakers) have failed to take account of this fact. When the term “nation” is used in the context of Catalonia’s legal status, we need to make it quite clear in what sense it’s being used.<br /> <br /> Let me hasten to add that the foregoing mustn’t be taken to imply that I’m supporting a Catalanist position here: that would be to fall into exactly the sort of confusion between linguistic usage and legal definition that I'm criticizing.<br /> <br /> == Recent edit warring ==<br /> <br /> Look, this back and forth edit warring isn't really helping anything. You guys need to discuss it here. As an outsider with no stake in this, could I clarify a few points and ask people to follow them up below? There seem to be three main issues here -<br /> <br /> ===Nation/region/nationality etc in the lead, post court case===<br /> <br /> Per the above section, I don't think anyone can argue against the idea Catalonia is a &quot;nation&quot; in the broadest sense of the word - in the same way that is is also a &quot;region&quot;, and &quot;area&quot; or whatever, as well as more formally an &quot;Autonomous Community&quot;. The Spanish Constitutional Court ruling would also seem - according to the [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/spain/7861118/Catalonia-can-call-itself-a-nation-rules-Spains-top-court.html Telegraph piece] being cited - to have now more formally confirmed/accepted the use of the term &quot;nation&quot; in the latest Statute of Autonomy. However, it seems that they are saying that precisely because it is simply a vague cultural term that does not have a &quot;legal value&quot; or constitutional implications - ie it's accurate, but not that significant. The issue at stake is what to highlight and prioritise in the lead, and I'm not sure that simply sourcing to the Telegraph piece helps. That article also describes Catalonia as a &quot;region&quot;, and it's not clear on what basis one term is being preferred here over any other. It seems to me that using more formally defined terminology, where the terms wiki-link to pages about terms as they are used in a Spanish context - ie as in [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;oldid=371840349 this version] - would be better.<br /> <br /> :I don't think this formula would work, because the list of Spain's &quot;constituent historical nationalities&quot; has never been laid out and, in any event, it would open a can of worms. One million pounds for those who try (and succeed on) it: would Navarre be part of the Basque nation? Is there a constituent nationality called Castile? If that's so, would Andalusia be part of it (it was part of Castile's Crown, after all..)? Etc, etc.<br /> <br /> :Nor can we accept, as some editor has pretended, that all of Spain's autonomous regions are nationalities. Madrid is an autonomous region, but neither a nation nor a nationality. The same goes for, let's say, Extremadura, Cantabria or Murcia. I'm sorry for being so blunt on the matter, but some of Spain's autonomous regions are nations whereas others are just that: regions. And we all know who's who on this.<br /> <br /> :The points are: <br /> <br /> ::(a) Catalonia's Autonomy Charter describes it as a nation (whether this is legally binding is of no importance: this is Wikipedia, not a constitutionalists' forum). This term ('nation') was sanctioned by (a) Catalonia's Parliament, (b) Spain's Parliament and (c) Catalonia's people in a referendum.<br /> <br /> ::(b) Spain's Constitutional Court has sanctioned its use (again: whether this is legally binding is of no importance: this is Wikipedia, not a constitutionalists' forum). <br /> <br /> ::(c) Countless English-language sources (and this is ''English'' Wikipedia, by the way) describe Catalonia as a nation. Those sources (for instance, The Daily Telegraph) can't be accused of any sort of nationalist leaning. Quite the contrary, as the Irish experience shows to us.<br /> <br /> [[User:Andreas Balart|Andreas Balart]] ([[User talk:Andreas Balart|talk]]) 08:27, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Order of languages===<br /> <br /> Is there a formal, agreed view in the real world of which of Catalan and Spanish is the &quot;main&quot; language, eg by virtue of official recognition as such within Catalonia and/or Spain as a whole, or are there official figures that reveal one language is more commonly spoken as a first language in Catalonia than the other? If so, the order should just follow that. If not, or there's no clear answer on those criteria, how about going by alphabetical order, ie Catalan first (although it would be slightly odd to apply this across all languages and put Aranese right at the top)?<br /> <br /> ===Parliament===<br /> <br /> It seems kind of obvious to me that the Parliament field in the infobox should refer to the Catalan parliament and link to that page, not to the national Spanish parliament. See [[Scotland]] for example.<br /> <br /> Anyway, those are my thoughts, if they help. There's plenty else that needs improving with the rest of the article, and genuine vandalism seems to slip by unnoticed while all this gets edit warred over. --&lt;small&gt;'''[[User:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;navy&quot;&gt;N-HH&lt;/font&gt;]]''' '''[[User talk:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]/[[Special:Contributions/N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;edits&lt;/font&gt;]]'''&lt;/small&gt; 15:23, 5 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Dear '''N-HH''',<br /> <br /> :If anything this point demostrates the sort of people who've hijacked and taken over this article over the last months and years, masquerading their byass as ''consensus'': they were actually ''so'' byassed that they '''deleted any reference''' to Catalonia's Parliament on Catalonia's infobox. It beggars belief.<br /> <br /> :We can put it down to a whole set of prejudices. Otherwise, it is rather difficult to understand this behaviour.<br /> <br /> :For too many months, I've been watching over it. But enough is enough. <br /> <br /> :[[User:Andreas Balart|Andreas Balart]] ([[User talk:Andreas Balart|talk]]) 08:32, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Automate archiving? ==<br /> <br /> Does anyone object to me setting up automatic archiving for this page using MiszaBot? Unless otherwise agreed, I would set it to archive threads that have been inactive for 30 days and keep ten threads.--[[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] ([[User talk:Oneiros|talk]]) 20:43, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :{{done}}--[[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] ([[User talk:Oneiros|talk]]) 13:47, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Spain high court rules against &quot;nation&quot; term ==<br /> <br /> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100710/ap_on_re_eu/eu_spain_catalan_charter &lt;span style=&quot;font-size: smaller;&quot; class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/75.85.14.106|75.85.14.106]] ([[User talk:75.85.14.106|talk]]) 02:14, 11 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;!-- Template:UnsignedIP --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;<br /> <br /> :No credit shoud be paid to anonymous vandalist comments<br /> :[[User:Eva Grossjean|Eva Grossjean]] ([[User talk:Eva Grossjean|talk]]) 14:11, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> ::Wikipedia is about speaking from the facts, not only from part of the political POV or from the legal POV (legal but not moral as the decisions of Spanish Constitutional Court are more than discussed). Anyone at Catalonia knows a significant part of the people living there feels that part of Spain as a nation with right of self-governing and any source considered trustable should reflect that. Any editor not trusting this can search about the Catalan display on this 11th July and will see that spanish high court is simply applying a centralist POV. BR anonymous. [[Special:Contributions/95.61.18.160|95.61.18.160]] ([[User talk:95.61.18.160|talk]]) 19:00, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Catalonia is not a nation (at least legally) but a historical nationality. ==<br /> <br /> Spain's Constitutional Court accepts the definition as nation for Catalonia but has no legal value. For legal purposes is still considered a historical nationality and in any case should not be included within the framework of political status. Catalonia is only an autonomous region of Spain. &lt;small&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Arkarull|Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Arkarull|contribs]]) 13:54, 12 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/small&gt;&lt;!-- Template:Unsigned --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;<br /> <br /> <br /> :Spain's constitutional Court is not the only POV ,and obviously is an interested POV. It is internationally accepted that part of the Catalan population feels Catalonia as a nation. It is a case very similar to Quebec so no such debate makes sense. The spanish constituional court is just an interested part in the conflict.[[Special:Contributions/95.61.18.160|95.61.18.160]] ([[User talk:95.61.18.160|talk]]) 19:03, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::For an encyclopedia the only valid POV is the legal POV, and in Spain the Constituctional Court's decissions are definitives. If Wikipedia doesn't respect that, a lot of other articles must be corrected. Scotland, for example, is only a historical country of United Kingdom or is a nation? I am Spanish but I respect the Catalan nationalism, as it has perfect historical foundations, and I think they are a nation, of course, but include social or personal POV in a section intended to the political situation, whatever it is, for better or for worse, is not encyclopedic. [[Special:Contributions/Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]]) 12:00, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Arkarull, the decission about nation/nationality is not any personal POV but it's sufficently backed up by legal texts. The Constitutional Court has ruled that the term 'nation' ''stands'' on Catalonia's autonomy charter's preamble, which, by the way, doubles as an organical law of the Spanish State (ie. passed by both Congress and Senate). <br /> <br /> :Whether or not this has legal consequences (it has not, according to the Court) is of no importance to Wikipedia. The point here is that the law (Spanish as well as Catalan) '''describes''' Catalonia as a nation. And all we do here in WP is to describe things.<br /> <br /> :Now: the Spanish Constitution does also acknowlege that Spain is made up of regions and nationalities. The fact that no list has been made as to which territories qualify as regions and which ones as nationalities doesn't mean that we ''all'' know who's who here: Is Catalonia a nationality? For sure. Is La Rioja a nationality? Of course not.<br /> <br /> :Finally, once we've accepted the 'nationality' terms as experessed in the Spanish Constitution, a purely linguistic point kicks into: 'nationality' implies the existence of a 'nation'. As Wikipedia states:<br /> <br /> ::Nationality is membership of a nation ''or'' sovereign state. Nationality can be acquired by being born within the jurisdiction of a state, by inheriting it from parents, or by a process of naturalization. ...<br /> ::en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationality<br /> <br /> :Therefore, if we accept the Constitutional existence of nationalities, it automatically derives in the existence of nations.<br /> <br /> [[User:Eva Grossjean|Eva Grossjean]] ([[User talk:Eva Grossjean|talk]]) 11:36, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::Ok, Eva, we both agree in that for us Catalonia is a Nation. But I think thar for legal purposes is not a clear idea:<br /> :::'''''Artículo 2 de la Constitución Española''': La Constitución se fundamenta en la indisoluble unidad de la Nación española, patria común e indivisible de todos los españoles, y reconoce y garantiza el derecho a la autonomía de las nacionalidades y regiones que la integran y la solidaridad entre todas ellas''. ('''Article 2 of the Spanish Constitution''': The Constitution is based on the indissoluble unity of the Spanish Nation, common and indivisible homeland of all Spanish, and recognizes and guarantees the right to autonomy of nationalities and regions which comprise and solidarity among them.)<br /> ::Therefore, the Constitution accepts the existence of &quot;nationalities&quot;, but aggregated into a single Nation, the Spanish. As a result, the Constitutional Court ruled that the designation as a nation that does the Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia (2006) in its preamble has no legal validity. Wikipedia's article for''nationality''not worth me because, as one librarian of this encyclopedia said to me once, Wikipedia is not Wikipedia's reference.<br /> ::In any case, this debate is sterile because the article has already been corrected by someone, replacing &quot;nation&quot; with &quot;nationality.&quot; &lt;small&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Arkarull|Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Arkarull|contribs]]) 17:47, 13 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/small&gt;&lt;!-- Template:Unsigned --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Catalonia&diff=373294913 2010-07-13T17:48:23Z

<p>Arkarull: /* Catalonia is not a nation (at least legally) but a historical nationality. */</p> <hr /> <div>{{Skip to talk}}<br /> {{Talk header|search=yes}}<br /> {{Off topic warning}}<br /> {{Controversial3}}<br /> {{WikiProject Spain|class=c|importance=top}}<br /> {{WikiProject Catalan-speaker|class=c|importance=top}}<br /> {{OnThisDay|date1=2004-09-11|oldid1=9955831}}<br /> {{auto archiving notice|bot=MiszaBot|age=30|dounreplied=yes}}<br /> {{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn<br /> |target=Talk:Catalonia/Archive index<br /> |mask=Talk:Catalonia/Archive &lt;#&gt;<br /> |leading_zeros=0<br /> |indexhere=yes}}<br /> {{User:MiszaBot/config<br /> |archiveheader = {{aan}}<br /> |maxarchivesize = 200K<br /> |counter = 5<br /> |minthreadsleft = 10<br /> |minthreadstoarchive = 1<br /> |algo = old(30d)<br /> |archive = Talk:Catalonia/Archive %(counter)d<br /> }}<br /> <br /> == Catalonia definition must me corrected ==<br /> <br /> We must differentiate between geographic and politics definition.<br /> Catalonia is a geographical area comprising actual Catalan Community in Spain and Cerdanya which actually is the french department of Pyrinèes Oriental. If there is any reference to Catalonia as a nation, it must cover all Catalonia and not merely the Catalan Community of Spain.<br /> Both populations consider theirselves Catalans sharing the same Catalan language, (even it is not considered an official language in France because political assumptions) whith respect for each political nationality, french or spanish. <br /> <br /> The definition must be considered as follows:<br /> <br /> ''Catalonia Community covers an area of 32,114 km² and has an official population of 7,210,508[1]. It borders Cerdanya in France and Andorra to the north, Aragon to the west, the Valencian Community to the south, and the Mediterranean Sea to the east (580 km coastline). Official languages are Catalan, Spanish and Aranese.''<br /> <br /> I understand that the separatist ideas of some french and spanish nationalism against the European Union cultural heritage must be erradicated if we want the wikipedia project to progress.<br /> <br /> :I'm sorry but I must disagree with you. There is another concept for the whole catalan-speaking territories and it is [[Catalan Countries]].<br /> :Catalonia's definition is being discussed in the section above (for a long time).--[[User:Civit cardona|Civit cardona]] ([[User talk:Civit cardona|talk]]) 14:04, 15 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> I struggle to believe that Perpignan in France should only be counted as &quot;Catalan speaking&quot;. They fly the Catalan flag, it's historically and cultural strongly Catalan, and the Rugby League team (which should also be mentioned and linked in the article) is called Catalan Dragons. In Catalan the area is called Northern Catalonia. <br /> <br /> I'm sure this is a controversial issue whatever is included in the article, but ignoring Northern Catalonia in the article completely strikes me as a whitewash and not a neutral POV. [[User:Davini994|Davini994]] ([[User talk:Davini994|talk]]) 10:22, 3 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :This article is hijacked by some editors near to spanish unionist positions. I do agree with you that not speaking about the Catalan nation and what and where is North Catalonia is simply a failure of reflecting the Catalan reality. If the article is only speaking about the autonomous community then it should be called 'Autonomous Community of Catalonia'[[Special:Contributions/95.61.18.160|95.61.18.160]] ([[User talk:95.61.18.160|talk]]) 19:09, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Flag of Catalonia ==<br /> <br /> I think that there are some problems with that sentence: &quot;The flag of Catalonia or ''[[Senyera]]'' (''flag'' in [[Catalan language|Catalan]]), is a [[vexillological symbol]] based on the [[coat of arms]] of the [[Crown of Aragon]], which consists of four red stripes on a golden background. It is an official symbol since the Statute of Catalonia of 1932.&quot; The flag was an heraldic emblem of Counts of Barcelona before being in the Crown of Aragon.--[[User:Vilarrubla|Vilar]] 22:48, 19 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Since both claims are correct, next time, instead than removing a correct fact from an article (i.e: &quot;based on the [[coat of arms]] of the [[Crown of Aragon]]&quot;), you should, if willing to add your POV, limit yourself to add to that sentence a &quot;and of the counts of barcelona&quot; instead than erasing the content (which is also fully referenced). --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 01:18, 20 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> ::I have not erased anything and that was not fully referenced. The reference #46 says: &quot;The flag of Catalonia, which is the traditional flag with four red stripes on a yellow background, shall be present on public buildings and during official acts held in Catalonia.&quot; and I don't see anything about Crown of Aragon or Counts of Barcelona in that reference. --[[User:Vilarrubla|Vilar]] 10:45, 20 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == The map ==<br /> <br /> Carles, noticing your last [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=302485241&amp;oldid=302474758 edit], I just want to point you that each and every other article about CCAA has the vectorial map (just take a look yourself). If we want to keep some equality and sense around wikipedia, the correct thing is to leave the other one. there is no real reasons for this article to be the exemption. My thoughts only. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 22:40, 16 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Sorry, Maurice, I beg to disagree. At least the maps for the Valencian Community and the Balearic Islands have also been changed today (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Valencian_Community&amp;diff=302475380&amp;oldid=302426446] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Balearic_Islands&amp;diff=302472767&amp;oldid=302008420]) to this kind of Spain-centered map. So the situation is not like you seem to describe: the map in Catalonia article being a unique strange singularity to be corrected with respect to a long well-established tradition in all the remaining communities. No. The fact is that just now some people propose this new solution. We can discuss it, of course. My initial point is that I prefer the maps those communities have had for a long time because they are more globally-minded and show their position not only inside Spain, but also in a European context. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 23:09, 16 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::Sadly, like so many other times, it is not a point of what we do prefer, but to continue the path followed by the majority of the other articles. Let's not forget that this article is part of an encyclopedia, and as such, all related articles must follow the same guidelines. If you take a look at all the articles about CCAA. Like it or not, the vectorial map seems to be the prefered by all the editors involved in the majority of all those articles. If you take a look at the portuguese districts([[Braga (district)]], [[Bragança (district)]], [[Faro (district)]], [[Lisboa (district)]]...), the french regions ([[Alsace]], [[Champagne-Ardenne]], [Bourgogne]], [[Nord-Pas-de-Calais]], [[Pays de la Loire]], [[Rhône-Alpes]]...) or the italian italian regions ([[Abruzzo]], [[Calabria]], [[Lazio]], [[Marche]], [[Sardinia]], [[Tuscany]]...), you will notice that they all do share the same maps and that are always &quot;country-centered&quot; (if I may say so). Having different types of maps depending on the region selected is in my opinion undesirable.<br /> <br /> ::That said, I believe that the correct thing is to implement the map used by the majority of the articles CCAA-related. In addition, let's not forget that this is this the english wikipedia, and as such, it is like the &quot;international version&quot; of it. If some user from Indonesia wants to learn about a CCAA (let's say Catalonia in this particular case) you can bet for sure he might be much more interested to understand where it is placed in relation to the rest of the country than in relation to Europe.<br /> <br /> ::I think that those are the 2 most important reasons to keep the vectorial map. If someday, Europe really becomes something close enough to a united country, then your position of an europen-minded map should be the one to follow... But only if that is the position for all the articles in wikipedia related to europen regions... Cheers. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 17:45, 17 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::Thanks for your explanation, Maurice, and sorry for my late reply (I am back from holidays just now). I agree with you that homogeneity is good in general, but I'm still not sure whether it constitutes a sufficient reason for the change you propose. I haven't seen any wiki policy enforcing this uniformity, although I agree with you that it is desirable. But, actually, there would be a way to make both of us happy, i.e. to preserve both good properties at once (global-minded maps and homogeneity): uploading maps like those we had during the last years for the Catalan-speaking communities also for the remaining Spanish autonomous communities, right? This is my proposal. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 08:51, 19 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::::I thought you were on vacations... Hope you enjoyed them! I don't mind your proposal but, do you know how to create maps? Because I don't. If nobody uploads those maps for the rest of the CCAA, we get back to start. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 09:49, 19 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::Yes, I've enjoyed them a lot, thanks! :) Good to see that you are open to a proposal that would solve both of our concern at once. As regards to the maps, this seems to completely feasible. I am checking that those files already exist: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Andaluc%C3%ADa.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Extremadura.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Castilla-La_Mancha.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Castilla_y_Le%C3%B3n.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_la_Comunidad_de_Madrid.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Galicia.png], etc. (you see the pattern). So homogeneity is not really a problem. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 10:34, 20 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Hi there Carles. Long time no see. <br /> <br /> I wanted to make you reconsider your position about keeping the european centered maps. For almost one year(?), you have been defending those maps against (quite a lot now) changes by multiple editors to the one used in the rest of CCAA related articles. We already discussed this matter long time ago (uniformity in wikipedia articles, the country being more important than the continent...).<br /> <br /> You know I don't agree with your position, but for the sake of both of us I left your option. But now, you should admit that your opinion is probably a minority.<br /> <br /> Tell me what you think. Cheers. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 10:05, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi Maurice! Nice to meet you here again. Hope you're doing fine.<br /> :I don't completely agree with your analysis of the situation. First, those maps are not my invention. They were already in stable versions of the entries when I joined the project, more than two years ago. Second, after a quick check on the history of the entry on [[Catalonia]], I've counted only four users changing the map to the Spanish-centered one since we discussed the issue. And none of them, unlike you, has bothered to write a single line on the talk page to state their points for the change. On the other hand, there has been one user who has proposed a [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mapa_de_localitzaci%C3%B3_a_les_comarques_catalanes.svg Catalan-centered map] which, coherently with my globally-minded approach, I don't like and I don't support. Therefore, I don't think that &quot;lonely Carles fighting against a majority of users who argue for a Spain-centered map&quot; is a faithful account of the situation, because they are few, they hardly argue, and there have even been proposals in a different direction. In this discussion, we made our positions quite clear. Let me remind my points:<br /> :* The main thing here is to offer an accurate map (faithful to both geographical and political reality) and as informative as possible to help readers from all over the world to locate these regions.<br /> :* In particular, the maps should clearly show the administrative borders of the autonomous communities, their position inside Spain (for they belong to this sovereign state, and nowadays sovereign states are the key element in geopolitical divisions), and their position in a wider context to give the maximum information to non-European readers. All of this can be achieved with the pictures I've been defending.<br /> :* Homogeneity with entries about other regions is certainly a good value to pursue and, as I already showed, it does not contradict any point above, because we already have in Commons maps of this kind (showing both Spanish and European context) for all the remaining Spanish regions.<br /> :--[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera#top|talk]]) 11:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Carles, all the autonomies of Spain have the same map. I understand that you are independentist but this it is not motive for including a map where you cannot see the whole country. I am sorry, but it isn't logical to include a map different to the rest. [[User:Diplomatiko|Diplomatiko]] ([[User talk:Diplomatiko|talk]]) 14:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi, Diplomatiko. Many thanks for joining the discussion. I would like to kindly ask you a couple of things. First, it would help the discussion a lot, if you would read carefully what has been said so far. In particular, you'll find a specific proposal dealing with the uniformity problem you are concerned with. Second, I would appreciate it very much if you would abstain from making assumptions on other users personal views. It doesn't really help the discussion (after all, personal opinions of the editors do not matter much when we are trying to produce a neutral text), and sometimes (this is the case now) you can be misled to wrong conclusions: I am not an independentist (not even a nationalist), as it can be easily seen in the userboxes in my webpage. Anyway, we can forget about this, because talk pages are not meant to discuss about any user, but about the article in question and to decide how to collectively improve it. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 14:50, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :I see you are taking your time to think about it. Fair enough. In the meantime, I shall restore the previous consensual map. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 10:19, 25 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> I'm restoring the regular map (the one which all the other articles use). There's no reason to use another map: NUTS maps don't offer an enough clear sight of a country subdivision location. Furthermore, this (and sometimes the Valencian Community one, for obvious reasons...) is the only country subdivision article in the entire Wikipedia where they're used. [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 21:01, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi Icallbs. Thanks for your comments. But, have you bothered to read the discussion above where I showed that your concerns on homogeneity in Spanish regions entries are compatible with my concerns for globality for non-Spanish readers? Please take a look at it. On the other hand, let me remind that prior to changing a disputed content, you should reach consensus, not the other way around as you have done know (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus#Consensus-building]). Cheers, --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:51, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Maybe you misunderstood &quot;NUTS&quot;. [[NUTS of Spain|These]] are the Spanish NUTS regions, in which the map you use is based. <br /> <br /> :: I've read that discussion, and I must say those maps aren't suitable at all in this kind of articles. They just aren't, just have a look at France's subdivisions articles, or Italy's, or Portugal's, or Poland's. Sadly, I think those &quot;concerns&quot; aren't really &quot;for globality&quot;. Exaxtly because non-Spanish users are the ones who will be reading this, they'll the ones the maps should be adressed to. I encourage you to read the consesus-building article you pointed before for the further seeking of a common point. Other users like MauritiusXIII can help us improving these aspects too. In the meantime, probably the regular map is the better option because of the homogeneity. Also, I'd like you to consider Dr01drpny's option, it's the same map as the rest of Spain's regions and it has the globality element.<br /> <br /> :: [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 18:45, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi. I combined both maps to try to fulfill both concerns regarding homogeneity and wider region location inside Europe. You can add it to the article if you agree with it: [[:File:Localització de Catalunya.png]]. Cheers. --[[User:Dr01drpny|Dr01drpny]] ([[User talk:Dr01drpny|talk]]) 23:45, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi there. Thank you very much, Dr01drpny, for your input. That moves towards the good direction to resolve the dispute, indeed. As for Icallbs, first let me say I'm sorry for having misunderstood the &quot;NUTS&quot; thing; I didn't know that concept. Thank you for pointing it out. However, you might want to apologize as well for assuming bad faith in me when you write &quot;I think those concerns aren't really for globality&quot;. I am proud to claim that all my contributions to Wikipedia (both in articles and in talk pages) are openly honest and faithful to my points of view; it would certainly be stupid to act otherwise when I am editing under my real name. So, this frank globality concern is starting to be addressed by Dr01drpny in his proposal, and I have tentatively tried how it looks in the article. I would like to ask him, since he looks very deft in map creation, to propose some other solutions which could make the European map bigger (now it is too hard to see). An easy solution is to increase the box on the right-bottom corner (there is some space on the sea and Africa that could be covered without problems). A better one would be to create something analogous to the maps used in [[Scotland]], [[Wales]] or [[England]], where the European map is the main one while the whole state (the UK in this case) is also shown in the box, which seems to be something of the highest importance to some users. After seeing (some of) these possibilities we could decide which is the nicest and most suitable for these articles. Needless to say, to satisfy the urge for homogeneity in Spanish autonomous communities articles, the new kind of map will have to be produced for each of them. Looking forward to hearing from all of you, --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:31, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Hi there. I agree with the idea of having a wider (Europe / World) localization map, especially for people from other countries. Still, there are some users who want homogeneity with the maps of all the other regions of Spain. Creating a new version of all these maps is a notable effort, and it would require a deeper consensus (currently the map is being changed almost every day). Maybe something to talk about in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Spain | WikiProject Spain]]. In the meanwhile I uploaded an updated version of the file with a bigger Europe map as Cnoguera asked. You can see the preview [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 | here]. --[[User:Dr01drpny|Dr01drpny]] ([[User talk:Dr01drpny|talk]]) 23:34, 6 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi, thanks again for you valuable help. That one is better indeed, but I still think that something like the UK maps would be even better (both having a clear depiction of the whole state administrative structure, as required by Maurice and Icallbs, and nice big global maps for a globally-minded English encyclopedia as seen e.g. in the UK entries). I suggest to explore that possibility before taking any decision. I understand the non-trivial effort the whole thing requires (and I truly thank you for your excellent technical help), but there certainly are strong concerns about homogeneity by several users, as you can see in the discussion above. As far as I am concerned, as a member of the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Catalan-speaking_Countries]], at least I'll work to have a uniform solution for the three articles under its scope. Sadly enough, while we are fruitfully discussing the issue here, some users like [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/79.153.124.250 this anonymous IP] keep trying to impose their point of view without bothering to contribute to the consensus building. I've already warned him about it. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:38, 7 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :However, if it is too difficult to produce these alternative maps, I suggest to go for the easiest solution and stick to the good old NUTS maps. Moreover there seems to be [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Basque_Country_%28autonomous_community%29#Edit_war_around_locator_map agreement on that elsewhere].--[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 15:27, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: That example doesn't suits our particular case... The country-centered map in that example just sucks! Portugal and France don't even appear. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 19:04, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Oh, yes. You're right, now I see it. I assumed, reasonably, that this discussion in [[Talk:Basque Country (autonomous community)]] was analogous to ours because there actually was an identical edit war proposing the same kind of map. But now I see that the discussion is strangely ignoring that one and proposing an ugly Spain-centered map where the country looks like an island... --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 19:46, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Like an island? Have you seen the German, French, Italian, Portuguese, or basically any other country subdivision article other than the British ones to use world maps for locating a region? It's stupid! Furthermore, the current map shows Portugal, the French border and even North Africa, which is much more than many (probably more than any other but the UK's constituent COUNTRIES [see what I did there?] articles). In the discussion you pointed at, there were only two votes... That's not a &quot;long-standing consensus&quot; nor it shows a reasonable solution. I'm sorry if I've been a bit rough in this comment, but these attempts to vandalize Wikipedia (specially the English one, cause it's the one millions of people from all countries, even non-English, read), trying to mislead them make me really upset. [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 20:34, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Yes, Icallbs, now you look upset indeed. Now you start referring to the proposals you don't like as &quot;stupid&quot; and to their defense as &quot;attempts to vandalize Wikipedia&quot; and &quot;trying to mislead&quot;... You know? it's a bad sign when one needs to use derogative terms to undermine the opponent's position in the discussion. But if you count to ten, take a deep breath, sit back and then read carefully the stuff above again, you'll realize what's written isn't that stupid after all. First, you'll see that the Spain-centered map where the country looks like an island I was referring to is, in fact, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_Comunidad_Vasca.png this one], and the island metaphor was already used in [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Basque_Country_(autonomous_community)#Edit_war_around_locator_map that discussion]. Second, you'll see I only attracted your attention to the Basque Country thing becauses it does resemble the discussion we currently having here, so it might be relevant. Third, you'll see I never described as a &quot;long-standing consensus&quot; what they have there, but I only said that &quot;there SEEMS to be an agreement&quot; there (and it really looks like that, when nobody has expressed any opinion against the NUTS map in that discussion thread; interestingly not even yourself after [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Basque_Country_(autonomous_community)&amp;diff=348810628&amp;oldid=348794880 you added the map you want]).<br /> :The discussion here is certainly far from being over. We are still waiting for new options from Dr01drpny or any other user able to produce them. So I wasn't restoring the NUTS maps (and BTW those are the really long-standing ones as a matter of fact in the Valencian Community, Balearic Islands and Catalonia entries) because of an alleged achievement of a new consensus. I was doing it because otherwise, when the map you like is there, some people seem to completely forget about the discussion and disappear for days. Interestingly enough, they suddenly come back when I restore the previous solution (sometimes yourself, sometimes some mysterious IPs which give little to none explanation for their edits). And, symmetrically, I could as well object that your putting back there the state-centered map is not fair before a decision is reached. But I won't, because my intention is already fulfilled by having people interested again in the discussion, which is the main issue here. Let us proceed then. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 09:51, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> * Please, don't mess this discussion here with the rest of the Autonomous Communities'. IF and only IF there is a general Wikipedia guideline regarding this issue, you can discuss other articles. Otherwise, keep it as a per article discussion and don't change other articles in which you are NOT involved, as the BAC one. We had our own discussion there and reached our own consensus. BTW, I don't get the &quot;goodness&quot; of that island-like map. It's geographical projection is not adequate for representing Spain, nor it does represent accurate detailed maps for each AC, as the green ones do. And again, these maps were replaced recently by anonymous users, probably to match them with the maps used in the Spanish Wiki, that may be are not the most accurate ones, you know. [[User:Deibid|David]] ([[User talk:Deibid|talk]]) 14:49, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: It is that &quot;IF&quot; precisely which I've been looking for weeks! Can't find anything... but I'm sure there is a guideline for these cases. If we find a guideline, we got the solution... I've tried quite a few wikiprojects but nothing... Any ideas, anyone? --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 19:47, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::As an outside observer who has occasionally reverted the wilder changes here ... I get confused exactly which map is which now, but FWIW I think the map should be clear in showing both where Catalonia is within Spain, and also where it is in the context of the wider European area. I'm not sure [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;oldid=352701357 this] version - the current one as I write - does that. It's too close-up, in the main part. I personally prefer the one [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 here], which I think was put together more recently. If you look for example at ones in respect of the UK, eg for [[Wales]] or [[Scotland]], they're even more &quot;global&quot; in perspective. In addition, there should ultimately be consistency across all the Spanish region/nation articles. &lt;small&gt;'''[[User:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;navy&quot;&gt;N-HH&lt;/font&gt;]]''' '''[[User talk:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]/[[Special:Contributions/N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;edits&lt;/font&gt;]]'''&lt;/small&gt; 14:56, 29 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 this version] is clearly the most desirable one. It has what all of us find important on a map. But we do lack of all the other maps for the rest of the Autonomous Communities. If someone knows how to add the small european map on the rest of them (and willing to), the problem is solved. I already tried to some days ago, but to manipulate svg's is beyond my comprehension... ;) --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 07:40, 30 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Catalan vs. Catalonian ==<br /> <br /> Most of the article uses the word &quot;Catalan&quot; as an English demonym adjective in almost all cases. The article even states in the infobox itself that the English demonym is &quot;Catalan&quot;. However, the section on popular culture uses the demonym &quot;Catalonian&quot;. Which is correct, if any? Either the references to &quot;Catalonian&quot; need to be changed to &quot;Catalan&quot; or, alternatively, &quot;Catalonian&quot; should be recognised as a possible demonym. [[User:Madeinsane|Madeinsane]] ([[User talk:Madeinsane|talk]]) 18:57, 13 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> You're right. 'Catalonian' is incorrect, or at least not as correct as 'Catalan'. I've removed the former from the article. That said, the entire section on popular culture needs clearing up. It is very badly written and might also be split to a new page. Any thoughts? --[[User:Tomclarke|Tomclarke]] ([[User talk:Tomclarke|talk]]) 15:15, 20 October 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Goth-Alania &gt; Catalonia ==<br /> <br /> &quot;...the name of the Spanish province Catalonia, which is but a slight deformation of Goth-Alania, &quot;province of the Goths and Alans&quot;...&quot; (from ''Alans'', Encyclopaedia Iranica) http://www.iranica.com/newsite/index.isc?Article=http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/unicode/v1f8/v1f8a013.html [[User:Böri|Böri]] ([[User talk:Böri|talk]]) 14:12, 25 December 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> --This is not true at all, just a fantasy theory, the name Catalonia probably comes from Gothalunda/Gothland &gt; Catalunya or from Castelans(people who lives in castles)&gt; Castelunya &gt; Catalunya <br /> --[[Special:Contributions/79.159.194.238|79.159.194.238]] ([[User talk:79.159.194.238|talk]]) 17:11, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == What ''is'' a nation, anyway? ==<br /> <br /> If you seek the answer to this question in ordinary English dictionaries, you’ll find entries like this:<br /> <br /> :a large aggregate of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular country or territory ''(Oxford New American Dictionary)''<br /> or<br /> :... '''1''' a body of people associated with a particular territory, that is sufficiently conscious of its unity to seek or to possess a government peculiarly its own ''(Webster’s Encyclopedic Dictionary)''<br /> <br /> or<br /> <br /> :... '''2''' a community of persons not constituting a state but bound by common descent, language, history, etc. ''(Collins English Dictionary)''<br /> <br /> So are Wikipedia editors entitled to describe Catalonia as a nation? On the basis of the foregoing, clearly they are. And what about the Spanish Constitutional Court? Well, neither they nor any other institution or legislature have any business to dictate English usage. Many editors (particularly some who are not native English speakers) have failed to take account of this fact. When the term “nation” is used in the context of Catalonia’s legal status, we need to make it quite clear in what sense it’s being used.<br /> <br /> Let me hasten to add that the foregoing mustn’t be taken to imply that I’m supporting a Catalanist position here: that would be to fall into exactly the sort of confusion between linguistic usage and legal definition that I'm criticizing.<br /> <br /> == Recent edit warring ==<br /> <br /> Look, this back and forth edit warring isn't really helping anything. You guys need to discuss it here. As an outsider with no stake in this, could I clarify a few points and ask people to follow them up below? There seem to be three main issues here -<br /> <br /> ===Nation/region/nationality etc in the lead, post court case===<br /> <br /> Per the above section, I don't think anyone can argue against the idea Catalonia is a &quot;nation&quot; in the broadest sense of the word - in the same way that is is also a &quot;region&quot;, and &quot;area&quot; or whatever, as well as more formally an &quot;Autonomous Community&quot;. The Spanish Constitutional Court ruling would also seem - according to the [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/spain/7861118/Catalonia-can-call-itself-a-nation-rules-Spains-top-court.html Telegraph piece] being cited - to have now more formally confirmed/accepted the use of the term &quot;nation&quot; in the latest Statute of Autonomy. However, it seems that they are saying that precisely because it is simply a vague cultural term that does not have a &quot;legal value&quot; or constitutional implications - ie it's accurate, but not that significant. The issue at stake is what to highlight and prioritise in the lead, and I'm not sure that simply sourcing to the Telegraph piece helps. That article also describes Catalonia as a &quot;region&quot;, and it's not clear on what basis one term is being preferred here over any other. It seems to me that using more formally defined terminology, where the terms wiki-link to pages about terms as they are used in a Spanish context - ie as in [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;oldid=371840349 this version] - would be better.<br /> <br /> :I don't think this formula would work, because the list of Spain's &quot;constituent historical nationalities&quot; has never been laid out and, in any event, it would open a can of worms. One million pounds for those who try (and succeed on) it: would Navarre be part of the Basque nation? Is there a constituent nationality called Castile? If that's so, would Andalusia be part of it (it was part of Castile's Crown, after all..)? Etc, etc.<br /> <br /> :Nor can we accept, as some editor has pretended, that all of Spain's autonomous regions are nationalities. Madrid is an autonomous region, but neither a nation nor a nationality. The same goes for, let's say, Extremadura, Cantabria or Murcia. I'm sorry for being so blunt on the matter, but some of Spain's autonomous regions are nations whereas others are just that: regions. And we all know who's who on this.<br /> <br /> :The points are: <br /> <br /> ::(a) Catalonia's Autonomy Charter describes it as a nation (whether this is legally binding is of no importance: this is Wikipedia, not a constitutionalists' forum). This term ('nation') was sanctioned by (a) Catalonia's Parliament, (b) Spain's Parliament and (c) Catalonia's people in a referendum.<br /> <br /> ::(b) Spain's Constitutional Court has sanctioned its use (again: whether this is legally binding is of no importance: this is Wikipedia, not a constitutionalists' forum). <br /> <br /> ::(c) Countless English-language sources (and this is ''English'' Wikipedia, by the way) describe Catalonia as a nation. Those sources (for instance, The Daily Telegraph) can't be accused of any sort of nationalist leaning. Quite the contrary, as the Irish experience shows to us.<br /> <br /> [[User:Andreas Balart|Andreas Balart]] ([[User talk:Andreas Balart|talk]]) 08:27, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Order of languages===<br /> <br /> Is there a formal, agreed view in the real world of which of Catalan and Spanish is the &quot;main&quot; language, eg by virtue of official recognition as such within Catalonia and/or Spain as a whole, or are there official figures that reveal one language is more commonly spoken as a first language in Catalonia than the other? If so, the order should just follow that. If not, or there's no clear answer on those criteria, how about going by alphabetical order, ie Catalan first (although it would be slightly odd to apply this across all languages and put Aranese right at the top)?<br /> <br /> ===Parliament===<br /> <br /> It seems kind of obvious to me that the Parliament field in the infobox should refer to the Catalan parliament and link to that page, not to the national Spanish parliament. See [[Scotland]] for example.<br /> <br /> Anyway, those are my thoughts, if they help. There's plenty else that needs improving with the rest of the article, and genuine vandalism seems to slip by unnoticed while all this gets edit warred over. --&lt;small&gt;'''[[User:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;navy&quot;&gt;N-HH&lt;/font&gt;]]''' '''[[User talk:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]/[[Special:Contributions/N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;edits&lt;/font&gt;]]'''&lt;/small&gt; 15:23, 5 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Dear '''N-HH''',<br /> <br /> :If anything this point demostrates the sort of people who've hijacked and taken over this article over the last months and years, masquerading their byass as ''consensus'': they were actually ''so'' byassed that they '''deleted any reference''' to Catalonia's Parliament on Catalonia's infobox. It beggars belief.<br /> <br /> :We can put it down to a whole set of prejudices. Otherwise, it is rather difficult to understand this behaviour.<br /> <br /> :For too many months, I've been watching over it. But enough is enough. <br /> <br /> :[[User:Andreas Balart|Andreas Balart]] ([[User talk:Andreas Balart|talk]]) 08:32, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Automate archiving? ==<br /> <br /> Does anyone object to me setting up automatic archiving for this page using MiszaBot? Unless otherwise agreed, I would set it to archive threads that have been inactive for 30 days and keep ten threads.--[[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] ([[User talk:Oneiros|talk]]) 20:43, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :{{done}}--[[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] ([[User talk:Oneiros|talk]]) 13:47, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Spain high court rules against &quot;nation&quot; term ==<br /> <br /> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100710/ap_on_re_eu/eu_spain_catalan_charter &lt;span style=&quot;font-size: smaller;&quot; class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/75.85.14.106|75.85.14.106]] ([[User talk:75.85.14.106|talk]]) 02:14, 11 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;!-- Template:UnsignedIP --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;<br /> <br /> :No credit shoud be paid to anonymous vandalist comments<br /> :[[User:Eva Grossjean|Eva Grossjean]] ([[User talk:Eva Grossjean|talk]]) 14:11, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> ::Wikipedia is about speaking from the facts, not only from part of the political POV or from the legal POV (legal but not moral as the decisions of Spanish Constitutional Court are more than discussed). Anyone at Catalonia knows a significant part of the people living there feels that part of Spain as a nation with right of self-governing and any source considered trustable should reflect that. Any editor not trusting this can search about the Catalan display on this 11th July and will see that spanish high court is simply applying a centralist POV. BR anonymous. [[Special:Contributions/95.61.18.160|95.61.18.160]] ([[User talk:95.61.18.160|talk]]) 19:00, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Catalonia is not a nation (at least legally) but a historical nationality. ==<br /> <br /> Spain's Constitutional Court accepts the definition as nation for Catalonia but has no legal value. For legal purposes is still considered a historical nationality and in any case should not be included within the framework of political status. Catalonia is only an autonomous region of Spain. &lt;small&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Arkarull|Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Arkarull|contribs]]) 13:54, 12 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/small&gt;&lt;!-- Template:Unsigned --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;<br /> <br /> <br /> :Spain's constitutional Court is not the only POV ,and obviously is an interested POV. It is internationally accepted that part of the Catalan population feels Catalonia as a nation. It is a case very similar to Quebec so no such debate makes sense. The spanish constituional court is just an interested part in the conflict.[[Special:Contributions/95.61.18.160|95.61.18.160]] ([[User talk:95.61.18.160|talk]]) 19:03, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::For an encyclopedia the only valid POV is the legal POV, and in Spain the Constituctional Court's decissions are definitives. If Wikipedia doesn't respect that, a lot of other articles must be corrected. Scotland, for example, is only a historical country of United Kingdom or is a nation? I am Spanish but I respect the Catalan nationalism, as it has perfect historical foundations, and I think they are a nation, of course, but include social or personal POV in a section intended to the political situation, whatever it is, for better or for worse, is not encyclopedic. [[Special:Contributions/Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]]) 12:00, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Arkarull, the decission about nation/nationality is not any personal POV but it's sufficently backed up by legal texts. The Constitutional Court has ruled that the term 'nation' ''stands'' on Catalonia's autonomy charter's preamble, which, by the way, doubles as an organical law of the Spanish State (ie. passed by both Congress and Senate). <br /> <br /> :Whether or not this has legal consequences (it has not, according to the Court) is of no importance to Wikipedia. The point here is that the law (Spanish as well as Catalan) '''describes''' Catalonia as a nation. And all we do here in WP is to describe things.<br /> <br /> :Now: the Spanish Constitution does also acknowlege that Spain is made up of regions and nationalities. The fact that no list has been made as to which territories qualify as regions and which ones as nationalities doesn't mean that we ''all'' know who's who here: Is Catalonia a nationality? For sure. Is La Rioja a nationality? Of course not.<br /> <br /> :Finally, once we've accepted the 'nationality' terms as experessed in the Spanish Constitution, a purely linguistic point kicks into: 'nationality' implies the existence of a 'nation'. As Wikipedia states:<br /> <br /> ::Nationality is membership of a nation ''or'' sovereign state. Nationality can be acquired by being born within the jurisdiction of a state, by inheriting it from parents, or by a process of naturalization. ...<br /> ::en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationality<br /> <br /> :Therefore, if we accept the Constitutional existence of nationalities, it automatically derives in the existence of nations.<br /> <br /> [[User:Eva Grossjean|Eva Grossjean]] ([[User talk:Eva Grossjean|talk]]) 11:36, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::Ok, Eva, we both agree in that for us Catalonia is a Nation. But I think thar for legal purposes is not a clear idea:<br /> :::'''''Artículo 2 de la Constitución Española''': La Constitución se fundamenta en la indisoluble unidad de la Nación española, patria común e indivisible de todos los españoles, y reconoce y garantiza el derecho a la autonomía de las nacionalidades y regiones que la integran y la solidaridad entre todas ellas''. ('''Article 2 of the Spanish Constitution''': The Constitution is based on the indissoluble unity of the Spanish Nation, common and indivisible homeland of all Spanish, and recognizes and guarantees the right to autonomy of nationalities and regions which comprise and solidarity among them.)<br /> ::Therefore, the Constitution accepts the existence of &quot;nationalities&quot;, but aggregated into a single Nation, the Spanish. As a result, the Constitutional Court ruled that the designation as a nation that does the Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia (2006) in its preamble has no legal validity. I read Wikipedia on''nationality''not worth me because, as one librarian of this encyclopedia said to me once, Wikipedia is not Wikipedia's reference.<br /> ::In any case, this debate is sterile because the article has already been corrected by someone, replacing &quot;nation&quot; with &quot;nationality.&quot; &lt;small&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Arkarull|Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Arkarull|contribs]]) 17:47, 13 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/small&gt;&lt;!-- Template:Unsigned --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Catalonia&diff=373294691 2010-07-13T17:47:08Z

<p>Arkarull: /* Catalonia is not a nation (at least legally) but a historical nationality. */</p> <hr /> <div>{{Skip to talk}}<br /> {{Talk header|search=yes}}<br /> {{Off topic warning}}<br /> {{Controversial3}}<br /> {{WikiProject Spain|class=c|importance=top}}<br /> {{WikiProject Catalan-speaker|class=c|importance=top}}<br /> {{OnThisDay|date1=2004-09-11|oldid1=9955831}}<br /> {{auto archiving notice|bot=MiszaBot|age=30|dounreplied=yes}}<br /> {{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn<br /> |target=Talk:Catalonia/Archive index<br /> |mask=Talk:Catalonia/Archive &lt;#&gt;<br /> |leading_zeros=0<br /> |indexhere=yes}}<br /> {{User:MiszaBot/config<br /> |archiveheader = {{aan}}<br /> |maxarchivesize = 200K<br /> |counter = 5<br /> |minthreadsleft = 10<br /> |minthreadstoarchive = 1<br /> |algo = old(30d)<br /> |archive = Talk:Catalonia/Archive %(counter)d<br /> }}<br /> <br /> == Catalonia definition must me corrected ==<br /> <br /> We must differentiate between geographic and politics definition.<br /> Catalonia is a geographical area comprising actual Catalan Community in Spain and Cerdanya which actually is the french department of Pyrinèes Oriental. If there is any reference to Catalonia as a nation, it must cover all Catalonia and not merely the Catalan Community of Spain.<br /> Both populations consider theirselves Catalans sharing the same Catalan language, (even it is not considered an official language in France because political assumptions) whith respect for each political nationality, french or spanish. <br /> <br /> The definition must be considered as follows:<br /> <br /> ''Catalonia Community covers an area of 32,114 km² and has an official population of 7,210,508[1]. It borders Cerdanya in France and Andorra to the north, Aragon to the west, the Valencian Community to the south, and the Mediterranean Sea to the east (580 km coastline). Official languages are Catalan, Spanish and Aranese.''<br /> <br /> I understand that the separatist ideas of some french and spanish nationalism against the European Union cultural heritage must be erradicated if we want the wikipedia project to progress.<br /> <br /> :I'm sorry but I must disagree with you. There is another concept for the whole catalan-speaking territories and it is [[Catalan Countries]].<br /> :Catalonia's definition is being discussed in the section above (for a long time).--[[User:Civit cardona|Civit cardona]] ([[User talk:Civit cardona|talk]]) 14:04, 15 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> I struggle to believe that Perpignan in France should only be counted as &quot;Catalan speaking&quot;. They fly the Catalan flag, it's historically and cultural strongly Catalan, and the Rugby League team (which should also be mentioned and linked in the article) is called Catalan Dragons. In Catalan the area is called Northern Catalonia. <br /> <br /> I'm sure this is a controversial issue whatever is included in the article, but ignoring Northern Catalonia in the article completely strikes me as a whitewash and not a neutral POV. [[User:Davini994|Davini994]] ([[User talk:Davini994|talk]]) 10:22, 3 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :This article is hijacked by some editors near to spanish unionist positions. I do agree with you that not speaking about the Catalan nation and what and where is North Catalonia is simply a failure of reflecting the Catalan reality. If the article is only speaking about the autonomous community then it should be called 'Autonomous Community of Catalonia'[[Special:Contributions/95.61.18.160|95.61.18.160]] ([[User talk:95.61.18.160|talk]]) 19:09, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Flag of Catalonia ==<br /> <br /> I think that there are some problems with that sentence: &quot;The flag of Catalonia or ''[[Senyera]]'' (''flag'' in [[Catalan language|Catalan]]), is a [[vexillological symbol]] based on the [[coat of arms]] of the [[Crown of Aragon]], which consists of four red stripes on a golden background. It is an official symbol since the Statute of Catalonia of 1932.&quot; The flag was an heraldic emblem of Counts of Barcelona before being in the Crown of Aragon.--[[User:Vilarrubla|Vilar]] 22:48, 19 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Since both claims are correct, next time, instead than removing a correct fact from an article (i.e: &quot;based on the [[coat of arms]] of the [[Crown of Aragon]]&quot;), you should, if willing to add your POV, limit yourself to add to that sentence a &quot;and of the counts of barcelona&quot; instead than erasing the content (which is also fully referenced). --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 01:18, 20 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> ::I have not erased anything and that was not fully referenced. The reference #46 says: &quot;The flag of Catalonia, which is the traditional flag with four red stripes on a yellow background, shall be present on public buildings and during official acts held in Catalonia.&quot; and I don't see anything about Crown of Aragon or Counts of Barcelona in that reference. --[[User:Vilarrubla|Vilar]] 10:45, 20 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == The map ==<br /> <br /> Carles, noticing your last [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=302485241&amp;oldid=302474758 edit], I just want to point you that each and every other article about CCAA has the vectorial map (just take a look yourself). If we want to keep some equality and sense around wikipedia, the correct thing is to leave the other one. there is no real reasons for this article to be the exemption. My thoughts only. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 22:40, 16 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Sorry, Maurice, I beg to disagree. At least the maps for the Valencian Community and the Balearic Islands have also been changed today (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Valencian_Community&amp;diff=302475380&amp;oldid=302426446] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Balearic_Islands&amp;diff=302472767&amp;oldid=302008420]) to this kind of Spain-centered map. So the situation is not like you seem to describe: the map in Catalonia article being a unique strange singularity to be corrected with respect to a long well-established tradition in all the remaining communities. No. The fact is that just now some people propose this new solution. We can discuss it, of course. My initial point is that I prefer the maps those communities have had for a long time because they are more globally-minded and show their position not only inside Spain, but also in a European context. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 23:09, 16 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::Sadly, like so many other times, it is not a point of what we do prefer, but to continue the path followed by the majority of the other articles. Let's not forget that this article is part of an encyclopedia, and as such, all related articles must follow the same guidelines. If you take a look at all the articles about CCAA. Like it or not, the vectorial map seems to be the prefered by all the editors involved in the majority of all those articles. If you take a look at the portuguese districts([[Braga (district)]], [[Bragança (district)]], [[Faro (district)]], [[Lisboa (district)]]...), the french regions ([[Alsace]], [[Champagne-Ardenne]], [Bourgogne]], [[Nord-Pas-de-Calais]], [[Pays de la Loire]], [[Rhône-Alpes]]...) or the italian italian regions ([[Abruzzo]], [[Calabria]], [[Lazio]], [[Marche]], [[Sardinia]], [[Tuscany]]...), you will notice that they all do share the same maps and that are always &quot;country-centered&quot; (if I may say so). Having different types of maps depending on the region selected is in my opinion undesirable.<br /> <br /> ::That said, I believe that the correct thing is to implement the map used by the majority of the articles CCAA-related. In addition, let's not forget that this is this the english wikipedia, and as such, it is like the &quot;international version&quot; of it. If some user from Indonesia wants to learn about a CCAA (let's say Catalonia in this particular case) you can bet for sure he might be much more interested to understand where it is placed in relation to the rest of the country than in relation to Europe.<br /> <br /> ::I think that those are the 2 most important reasons to keep the vectorial map. If someday, Europe really becomes something close enough to a united country, then your position of an europen-minded map should be the one to follow... But only if that is the position for all the articles in wikipedia related to europen regions... Cheers. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 17:45, 17 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::Thanks for your explanation, Maurice, and sorry for my late reply (I am back from holidays just now). I agree with you that homogeneity is good in general, but I'm still not sure whether it constitutes a sufficient reason for the change you propose. I haven't seen any wiki policy enforcing this uniformity, although I agree with you that it is desirable. But, actually, there would be a way to make both of us happy, i.e. to preserve both good properties at once (global-minded maps and homogeneity): uploading maps like those we had during the last years for the Catalan-speaking communities also for the remaining Spanish autonomous communities, right? This is my proposal. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 08:51, 19 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::::I thought you were on vacations... Hope you enjoyed them! I don't mind your proposal but, do you know how to create maps? Because I don't. If nobody uploads those maps for the rest of the CCAA, we get back to start. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 09:49, 19 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::Yes, I've enjoyed them a lot, thanks! :) Good to see that you are open to a proposal that would solve both of our concern at once. As regards to the maps, this seems to completely feasible. I am checking that those files already exist: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Andaluc%C3%ADa.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Extremadura.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Castilla-La_Mancha.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Castilla_y_Le%C3%B3n.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_la_Comunidad_de_Madrid.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Galicia.png], etc. (you see the pattern). So homogeneity is not really a problem. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 10:34, 20 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Hi there Carles. Long time no see. <br /> <br /> I wanted to make you reconsider your position about keeping the european centered maps. For almost one year(?), you have been defending those maps against (quite a lot now) changes by multiple editors to the one used in the rest of CCAA related articles. We already discussed this matter long time ago (uniformity in wikipedia articles, the country being more important than the continent...).<br /> <br /> You know I don't agree with your position, but for the sake of both of us I left your option. But now, you should admit that your opinion is probably a minority.<br /> <br /> Tell me what you think. Cheers. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 10:05, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi Maurice! Nice to meet you here again. Hope you're doing fine.<br /> :I don't completely agree with your analysis of the situation. First, those maps are not my invention. They were already in stable versions of the entries when I joined the project, more than two years ago. Second, after a quick check on the history of the entry on [[Catalonia]], I've counted only four users changing the map to the Spanish-centered one since we discussed the issue. And none of them, unlike you, has bothered to write a single line on the talk page to state their points for the change. On the other hand, there has been one user who has proposed a [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mapa_de_localitzaci%C3%B3_a_les_comarques_catalanes.svg Catalan-centered map] which, coherently with my globally-minded approach, I don't like and I don't support. Therefore, I don't think that &quot;lonely Carles fighting against a majority of users who argue for a Spain-centered map&quot; is a faithful account of the situation, because they are few, they hardly argue, and there have even been proposals in a different direction. In this discussion, we made our positions quite clear. Let me remind my points:<br /> :* The main thing here is to offer an accurate map (faithful to both geographical and political reality) and as informative as possible to help readers from all over the world to locate these regions.<br /> :* In particular, the maps should clearly show the administrative borders of the autonomous communities, their position inside Spain (for they belong to this sovereign state, and nowadays sovereign states are the key element in geopolitical divisions), and their position in a wider context to give the maximum information to non-European readers. All of this can be achieved with the pictures I've been defending.<br /> :* Homogeneity with entries about other regions is certainly a good value to pursue and, as I already showed, it does not contradict any point above, because we already have in Commons maps of this kind (showing both Spanish and European context) for all the remaining Spanish regions.<br /> :--[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera#top|talk]]) 11:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Carles, all the autonomies of Spain have the same map. I understand that you are independentist but this it is not motive for including a map where you cannot see the whole country. I am sorry, but it isn't logical to include a map different to the rest. [[User:Diplomatiko|Diplomatiko]] ([[User talk:Diplomatiko|talk]]) 14:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi, Diplomatiko. Many thanks for joining the discussion. I would like to kindly ask you a couple of things. First, it would help the discussion a lot, if you would read carefully what has been said so far. In particular, you'll find a specific proposal dealing with the uniformity problem you are concerned with. Second, I would appreciate it very much if you would abstain from making assumptions on other users personal views. It doesn't really help the discussion (after all, personal opinions of the editors do not matter much when we are trying to produce a neutral text), and sometimes (this is the case now) you can be misled to wrong conclusions: I am not an independentist (not even a nationalist), as it can be easily seen in the userboxes in my webpage. Anyway, we can forget about this, because talk pages are not meant to discuss about any user, but about the article in question and to decide how to collectively improve it. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 14:50, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :I see you are taking your time to think about it. Fair enough. In the meantime, I shall restore the previous consensual map. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 10:19, 25 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> I'm restoring the regular map (the one which all the other articles use). There's no reason to use another map: NUTS maps don't offer an enough clear sight of a country subdivision location. Furthermore, this (and sometimes the Valencian Community one, for obvious reasons...) is the only country subdivision article in the entire Wikipedia where they're used. [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 21:01, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi Icallbs. Thanks for your comments. But, have you bothered to read the discussion above where I showed that your concerns on homogeneity in Spanish regions entries are compatible with my concerns for globality for non-Spanish readers? Please take a look at it. On the other hand, let me remind that prior to changing a disputed content, you should reach consensus, not the other way around as you have done know (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus#Consensus-building]). Cheers, --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:51, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Maybe you misunderstood &quot;NUTS&quot;. [[NUTS of Spain|These]] are the Spanish NUTS regions, in which the map you use is based. <br /> <br /> :: I've read that discussion, and I must say those maps aren't suitable at all in this kind of articles. They just aren't, just have a look at France's subdivisions articles, or Italy's, or Portugal's, or Poland's. Sadly, I think those &quot;concerns&quot; aren't really &quot;for globality&quot;. Exaxtly because non-Spanish users are the ones who will be reading this, they'll the ones the maps should be adressed to. I encourage you to read the consesus-building article you pointed before for the further seeking of a common point. Other users like MauritiusXIII can help us improving these aspects too. In the meantime, probably the regular map is the better option because of the homogeneity. Also, I'd like you to consider Dr01drpny's option, it's the same map as the rest of Spain's regions and it has the globality element.<br /> <br /> :: [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 18:45, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi. I combined both maps to try to fulfill both concerns regarding homogeneity and wider region location inside Europe. You can add it to the article if you agree with it: [[:File:Localització de Catalunya.png]]. Cheers. --[[User:Dr01drpny|Dr01drpny]] ([[User talk:Dr01drpny|talk]]) 23:45, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi there. Thank you very much, Dr01drpny, for your input. That moves towards the good direction to resolve the dispute, indeed. As for Icallbs, first let me say I'm sorry for having misunderstood the &quot;NUTS&quot; thing; I didn't know that concept. Thank you for pointing it out. However, you might want to apologize as well for assuming bad faith in me when you write &quot;I think those concerns aren't really for globality&quot;. I am proud to claim that all my contributions to Wikipedia (both in articles and in talk pages) are openly honest and faithful to my points of view; it would certainly be stupid to act otherwise when I am editing under my real name. So, this frank globality concern is starting to be addressed by Dr01drpny in his proposal, and I have tentatively tried how it looks in the article. I would like to ask him, since he looks very deft in map creation, to propose some other solutions which could make the European map bigger (now it is too hard to see). An easy solution is to increase the box on the right-bottom corner (there is some space on the sea and Africa that could be covered without problems). A better one would be to create something analogous to the maps used in [[Scotland]], [[Wales]] or [[England]], where the European map is the main one while the whole state (the UK in this case) is also shown in the box, which seems to be something of the highest importance to some users. After seeing (some of) these possibilities we could decide which is the nicest and most suitable for these articles. Needless to say, to satisfy the urge for homogeneity in Spanish autonomous communities articles, the new kind of map will have to be produced for each of them. Looking forward to hearing from all of you, --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:31, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Hi there. I agree with the idea of having a wider (Europe / World) localization map, especially for people from other countries. Still, there are some users who want homogeneity with the maps of all the other regions of Spain. Creating a new version of all these maps is a notable effort, and it would require a deeper consensus (currently the map is being changed almost every day). Maybe something to talk about in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Spain | WikiProject Spain]]. In the meanwhile I uploaded an updated version of the file with a bigger Europe map as Cnoguera asked. You can see the preview [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 | here]. --[[User:Dr01drpny|Dr01drpny]] ([[User talk:Dr01drpny|talk]]) 23:34, 6 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi, thanks again for you valuable help. That one is better indeed, but I still think that something like the UK maps would be even better (both having a clear depiction of the whole state administrative structure, as required by Maurice and Icallbs, and nice big global maps for a globally-minded English encyclopedia as seen e.g. in the UK entries). I suggest to explore that possibility before taking any decision. I understand the non-trivial effort the whole thing requires (and I truly thank you for your excellent technical help), but there certainly are strong concerns about homogeneity by several users, as you can see in the discussion above. As far as I am concerned, as a member of the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Catalan-speaking_Countries]], at least I'll work to have a uniform solution for the three articles under its scope. Sadly enough, while we are fruitfully discussing the issue here, some users like [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/79.153.124.250 this anonymous IP] keep trying to impose their point of view without bothering to contribute to the consensus building. I've already warned him about it. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:38, 7 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :However, if it is too difficult to produce these alternative maps, I suggest to go for the easiest solution and stick to the good old NUTS maps. Moreover there seems to be [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Basque_Country_%28autonomous_community%29#Edit_war_around_locator_map agreement on that elsewhere].--[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 15:27, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: That example doesn't suits our particular case... The country-centered map in that example just sucks! Portugal and France don't even appear. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 19:04, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Oh, yes. You're right, now I see it. I assumed, reasonably, that this discussion in [[Talk:Basque Country (autonomous community)]] was analogous to ours because there actually was an identical edit war proposing the same kind of map. But now I see that the discussion is strangely ignoring that one and proposing an ugly Spain-centered map where the country looks like an island... --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 19:46, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Like an island? Have you seen the German, French, Italian, Portuguese, or basically any other country subdivision article other than the British ones to use world maps for locating a region? It's stupid! Furthermore, the current map shows Portugal, the French border and even North Africa, which is much more than many (probably more than any other but the UK's constituent COUNTRIES [see what I did there?] articles). In the discussion you pointed at, there were only two votes... That's not a &quot;long-standing consensus&quot; nor it shows a reasonable solution. I'm sorry if I've been a bit rough in this comment, but these attempts to vandalize Wikipedia (specially the English one, cause it's the one millions of people from all countries, even non-English, read), trying to mislead them make me really upset. [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 20:34, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Yes, Icallbs, now you look upset indeed. Now you start referring to the proposals you don't like as &quot;stupid&quot; and to their defense as &quot;attempts to vandalize Wikipedia&quot; and &quot;trying to mislead&quot;... You know? it's a bad sign when one needs to use derogative terms to undermine the opponent's position in the discussion. But if you count to ten, take a deep breath, sit back and then read carefully the stuff above again, you'll realize what's written isn't that stupid after all. First, you'll see that the Spain-centered map where the country looks like an island I was referring to is, in fact, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_Comunidad_Vasca.png this one], and the island metaphor was already used in [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Basque_Country_(autonomous_community)#Edit_war_around_locator_map that discussion]. Second, you'll see I only attracted your attention to the Basque Country thing becauses it does resemble the discussion we currently having here, so it might be relevant. Third, you'll see I never described as a &quot;long-standing consensus&quot; what they have there, but I only said that &quot;there SEEMS to be an agreement&quot; there (and it really looks like that, when nobody has expressed any opinion against the NUTS map in that discussion thread; interestingly not even yourself after [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Basque_Country_(autonomous_community)&amp;diff=348810628&amp;oldid=348794880 you added the map you want]).<br /> :The discussion here is certainly far from being over. We are still waiting for new options from Dr01drpny or any other user able to produce them. So I wasn't restoring the NUTS maps (and BTW those are the really long-standing ones as a matter of fact in the Valencian Community, Balearic Islands and Catalonia entries) because of an alleged achievement of a new consensus. I was doing it because otherwise, when the map you like is there, some people seem to completely forget about the discussion and disappear for days. Interestingly enough, they suddenly come back when I restore the previous solution (sometimes yourself, sometimes some mysterious IPs which give little to none explanation for their edits). And, symmetrically, I could as well object that your putting back there the state-centered map is not fair before a decision is reached. But I won't, because my intention is already fulfilled by having people interested again in the discussion, which is the main issue here. Let us proceed then. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 09:51, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> * Please, don't mess this discussion here with the rest of the Autonomous Communities'. IF and only IF there is a general Wikipedia guideline regarding this issue, you can discuss other articles. Otherwise, keep it as a per article discussion and don't change other articles in which you are NOT involved, as the BAC one. We had our own discussion there and reached our own consensus. BTW, I don't get the &quot;goodness&quot; of that island-like map. It's geographical projection is not adequate for representing Spain, nor it does represent accurate detailed maps for each AC, as the green ones do. And again, these maps were replaced recently by anonymous users, probably to match them with the maps used in the Spanish Wiki, that may be are not the most accurate ones, you know. [[User:Deibid|David]] ([[User talk:Deibid|talk]]) 14:49, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: It is that &quot;IF&quot; precisely which I've been looking for weeks! Can't find anything... but I'm sure there is a guideline for these cases. If we find a guideline, we got the solution... I've tried quite a few wikiprojects but nothing... Any ideas, anyone? --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 19:47, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::As an outside observer who has occasionally reverted the wilder changes here ... I get confused exactly which map is which now, but FWIW I think the map should be clear in showing both where Catalonia is within Spain, and also where it is in the context of the wider European area. I'm not sure [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;oldid=352701357 this] version - the current one as I write - does that. It's too close-up, in the main part. I personally prefer the one [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 here], which I think was put together more recently. If you look for example at ones in respect of the UK, eg for [[Wales]] or [[Scotland]], they're even more &quot;global&quot; in perspective. In addition, there should ultimately be consistency across all the Spanish region/nation articles. &lt;small&gt;'''[[User:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;navy&quot;&gt;N-HH&lt;/font&gt;]]''' '''[[User talk:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]/[[Special:Contributions/N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;edits&lt;/font&gt;]]'''&lt;/small&gt; 14:56, 29 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 this version] is clearly the most desirable one. It has what all of us find important on a map. But we do lack of all the other maps for the rest of the Autonomous Communities. If someone knows how to add the small european map on the rest of them (and willing to), the problem is solved. I already tried to some days ago, but to manipulate svg's is beyond my comprehension... ;) --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 07:40, 30 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Catalan vs. Catalonian ==<br /> <br /> Most of the article uses the word &quot;Catalan&quot; as an English demonym adjective in almost all cases. The article even states in the infobox itself that the English demonym is &quot;Catalan&quot;. However, the section on popular culture uses the demonym &quot;Catalonian&quot;. Which is correct, if any? Either the references to &quot;Catalonian&quot; need to be changed to &quot;Catalan&quot; or, alternatively, &quot;Catalonian&quot; should be recognised as a possible demonym. [[User:Madeinsane|Madeinsane]] ([[User talk:Madeinsane|talk]]) 18:57, 13 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> You're right. 'Catalonian' is incorrect, or at least not as correct as 'Catalan'. I've removed the former from the article. That said, the entire section on popular culture needs clearing up. It is very badly written and might also be split to a new page. Any thoughts? --[[User:Tomclarke|Tomclarke]] ([[User talk:Tomclarke|talk]]) 15:15, 20 October 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Goth-Alania &gt; Catalonia ==<br /> <br /> &quot;...the name of the Spanish province Catalonia, which is but a slight deformation of Goth-Alania, &quot;province of the Goths and Alans&quot;...&quot; (from ''Alans'', Encyclopaedia Iranica) http://www.iranica.com/newsite/index.isc?Article=http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/unicode/v1f8/v1f8a013.html [[User:Böri|Böri]] ([[User talk:Böri|talk]]) 14:12, 25 December 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> --This is not true at all, just a fantasy theory, the name Catalonia probably comes from Gothalunda/Gothland &gt; Catalunya or from Castelans(people who lives in castles)&gt; Castelunya &gt; Catalunya <br /> --[[Special:Contributions/79.159.194.238|79.159.194.238]] ([[User talk:79.159.194.238|talk]]) 17:11, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == What ''is'' a nation, anyway? ==<br /> <br /> If you seek the answer to this question in ordinary English dictionaries, you’ll find entries like this:<br /> <br /> :a large aggregate of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular country or territory ''(Oxford New American Dictionary)''<br /> or<br /> :... '''1''' a body of people associated with a particular territory, that is sufficiently conscious of its unity to seek or to possess a government peculiarly its own ''(Webster’s Encyclopedic Dictionary)''<br /> <br /> or<br /> <br /> :... '''2''' a community of persons not constituting a state but bound by common descent, language, history, etc. ''(Collins English Dictionary)''<br /> <br /> So are Wikipedia editors entitled to describe Catalonia as a nation? On the basis of the foregoing, clearly they are. And what about the Spanish Constitutional Court? Well, neither they nor any other institution or legislature have any business to dictate English usage. Many editors (particularly some who are not native English speakers) have failed to take account of this fact. When the term “nation” is used in the context of Catalonia’s legal status, we need to make it quite clear in what sense it’s being used.<br /> <br /> Let me hasten to add that the foregoing mustn’t be taken to imply that I’m supporting a Catalanist position here: that would be to fall into exactly the sort of confusion between linguistic usage and legal definition that I'm criticizing.<br /> <br /> == Recent edit warring ==<br /> <br /> Look, this back and forth edit warring isn't really helping anything. You guys need to discuss it here. As an outsider with no stake in this, could I clarify a few points and ask people to follow them up below? There seem to be three main issues here -<br /> <br /> ===Nation/region/nationality etc in the lead, post court case===<br /> <br /> Per the above section, I don't think anyone can argue against the idea Catalonia is a &quot;nation&quot; in the broadest sense of the word - in the same way that is is also a &quot;region&quot;, and &quot;area&quot; or whatever, as well as more formally an &quot;Autonomous Community&quot;. The Spanish Constitutional Court ruling would also seem - according to the [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/spain/7861118/Catalonia-can-call-itself-a-nation-rules-Spains-top-court.html Telegraph piece] being cited - to have now more formally confirmed/accepted the use of the term &quot;nation&quot; in the latest Statute of Autonomy. However, it seems that they are saying that precisely because it is simply a vague cultural term that does not have a &quot;legal value&quot; or constitutional implications - ie it's accurate, but not that significant. The issue at stake is what to highlight and prioritise in the lead, and I'm not sure that simply sourcing to the Telegraph piece helps. That article also describes Catalonia as a &quot;region&quot;, and it's not clear on what basis one term is being preferred here over any other. It seems to me that using more formally defined terminology, where the terms wiki-link to pages about terms as they are used in a Spanish context - ie as in [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;oldid=371840349 this version] - would be better.<br /> <br /> :I don't think this formula would work, because the list of Spain's &quot;constituent historical nationalities&quot; has never been laid out and, in any event, it would open a can of worms. One million pounds for those who try (and succeed on) it: would Navarre be part of the Basque nation? Is there a constituent nationality called Castile? If that's so, would Andalusia be part of it (it was part of Castile's Crown, after all..)? Etc, etc.<br /> <br /> :Nor can we accept, as some editor has pretended, that all of Spain's autonomous regions are nationalities. Madrid is an autonomous region, but neither a nation nor a nationality. The same goes for, let's say, Extremadura, Cantabria or Murcia. I'm sorry for being so blunt on the matter, but some of Spain's autonomous regions are nations whereas others are just that: regions. And we all know who's who on this.<br /> <br /> :The points are: <br /> <br /> ::(a) Catalonia's Autonomy Charter describes it as a nation (whether this is legally binding is of no importance: this is Wikipedia, not a constitutionalists' forum). This term ('nation') was sanctioned by (a) Catalonia's Parliament, (b) Spain's Parliament and (c) Catalonia's people in a referendum.<br /> <br /> ::(b) Spain's Constitutional Court has sanctioned its use (again: whether this is legally binding is of no importance: this is Wikipedia, not a constitutionalists' forum). <br /> <br /> ::(c) Countless English-language sources (and this is ''English'' Wikipedia, by the way) describe Catalonia as a nation. Those sources (for instance, The Daily Telegraph) can't be accused of any sort of nationalist leaning. Quite the contrary, as the Irish experience shows to us.<br /> <br /> [[User:Andreas Balart|Andreas Balart]] ([[User talk:Andreas Balart|talk]]) 08:27, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Order of languages===<br /> <br /> Is there a formal, agreed view in the real world of which of Catalan and Spanish is the &quot;main&quot; language, eg by virtue of official recognition as such within Catalonia and/or Spain as a whole, or are there official figures that reveal one language is more commonly spoken as a first language in Catalonia than the other? If so, the order should just follow that. If not, or there's no clear answer on those criteria, how about going by alphabetical order, ie Catalan first (although it would be slightly odd to apply this across all languages and put Aranese right at the top)?<br /> <br /> ===Parliament===<br /> <br /> It seems kind of obvious to me that the Parliament field in the infobox should refer to the Catalan parliament and link to that page, not to the national Spanish parliament. See [[Scotland]] for example.<br /> <br /> Anyway, those are my thoughts, if they help. There's plenty else that needs improving with the rest of the article, and genuine vandalism seems to slip by unnoticed while all this gets edit warred over. --&lt;small&gt;'''[[User:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;navy&quot;&gt;N-HH&lt;/font&gt;]]''' '''[[User talk:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]/[[Special:Contributions/N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;edits&lt;/font&gt;]]'''&lt;/small&gt; 15:23, 5 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Dear '''N-HH''',<br /> <br /> :If anything this point demostrates the sort of people who've hijacked and taken over this article over the last months and years, masquerading their byass as ''consensus'': they were actually ''so'' byassed that they '''deleted any reference''' to Catalonia's Parliament on Catalonia's infobox. It beggars belief.<br /> <br /> :We can put it down to a whole set of prejudices. Otherwise, it is rather difficult to understand this behaviour.<br /> <br /> :For too many months, I've been watching over it. But enough is enough. <br /> <br /> :[[User:Andreas Balart|Andreas Balart]] ([[User talk:Andreas Balart|talk]]) 08:32, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Automate archiving? ==<br /> <br /> Does anyone object to me setting up automatic archiving for this page using MiszaBot? Unless otherwise agreed, I would set it to archive threads that have been inactive for 30 days and keep ten threads.--[[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] ([[User talk:Oneiros|talk]]) 20:43, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :{{done}}--[[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] ([[User talk:Oneiros|talk]]) 13:47, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Spain high court rules against &quot;nation&quot; term ==<br /> <br /> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100710/ap_on_re_eu/eu_spain_catalan_charter &lt;span style=&quot;font-size: smaller;&quot; class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/75.85.14.106|75.85.14.106]] ([[User talk:75.85.14.106|talk]]) 02:14, 11 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;!-- Template:UnsignedIP --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;<br /> <br /> :No credit shoud be paid to anonymous vandalist comments<br /> :[[User:Eva Grossjean|Eva Grossjean]] ([[User talk:Eva Grossjean|talk]]) 14:11, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> ::Wikipedia is about speaking from the facts, not only from part of the political POV or from the legal POV (legal but not moral as the decisions of Spanish Constitutional Court are more than discussed). Anyone at Catalonia knows a significant part of the people living there feels that part of Spain as a nation with right of self-governing and any source considered trustable should reflect that. Any editor not trusting this can search about the Catalan display on this 11th July and will see that spanish high court is simply applying a centralist POV. BR anonymous. [[Special:Contributions/95.61.18.160|95.61.18.160]] ([[User talk:95.61.18.160|talk]]) 19:00, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Catalonia is not a nation (at least legally) but a historical nationality. ==<br /> <br /> Spain's Constitutional Court accepts the definition as nation for Catalonia but has no legal value. For legal purposes is still considered a historical nationality and in any case should not be included within the framework of political status. Catalonia is only an autonomous region of Spain. &lt;small&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Arkarull|Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Arkarull|contribs]]) 13:54, 12 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/small&gt;&lt;!-- Template:Unsigned --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;<br /> <br /> <br /> :Spain's constitutional Court is not the only POV ,and obviously is an interested POV. It is internationally accepted that part of the Catalan population feels Catalonia as a nation. It is a case very similar to Quebec so no such debate makes sense. The spanish constituional court is just an interested part in the conflict.[[Special:Contributions/95.61.18.160|95.61.18.160]] ([[User talk:95.61.18.160|talk]]) 19:03, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::For an encyclopedia the only valid POV is the legal POV, and in Spain the Constituctional Court's decissions are definitives. If Wikipedia doesn't respect that, a lot of other articles must be corrected. Scotland, for example, is only a historical country of United Kingdom or is a nation? I am Spanish but I respect the Catalan nationalism, as it has perfect historical foundations, and I think they are a nation, of course, but include social or personal POV in a section intended to the political situation, whatever it is, for better or for worse, is not encyclopedic. [[Special:Contributions/Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]]) 12:00, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Arkarull, the decission about nation/nationality is not any personal POV but it's sufficently backed up by legal texts. The Constitutional Court has ruled that the term 'nation' ''stands'' on Catalonia's autonomy charter's preamble, which, by the way, doubles as an organical law of the Spanish State (ie. passed by both Congress and Senate). <br /> <br /> :Whether or not this has legal consequences (it has not, according to the Court) is of no importance to Wikipedia. The point here is that the law (Spanish as well as Catalan) '''describes''' Catalonia as a nation. And all we do here in WP is to describe things.<br /> <br /> :Now: the Spanish Constitution does also acknowlege that Spain is made up of regions and nationalities. The fact that no list has been made as to which territories qualify as regions and which ones as nationalities doesn't mean that we ''all'' know who's who here: Is Catalonia a nationality? For sure. Is La Rioja a nationality? Of course not.<br /> <br /> :Finally, once we've accepted the 'nationality' terms as experessed in the Spanish Constitution, a purely linguistic point kicks into: 'nationality' implies the existence of a 'nation'. As Wikipedia states:<br /> <br /> ::Nationality is membership of a nation ''or'' sovereign state. Nationality can be acquired by being born within the jurisdiction of a state, by inheriting it from parents, or by a process of naturalization. ...<br /> ::en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationality<br /> <br /> :Therefore, if we accept the Constitutional existence of nationalities, it automatically derives in the existence of nations.<br /> <br /> [[User:Eva Grossjean|Eva Grossjean]] ([[User talk:Eva Grossjean|talk]]) 11:36, 13 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::Ok, Eva, we both agree in that for us Catalonia is a Nation. But I think thar for legal purposes is not a clear idea:<br /> :::'''''Artículo 2 de la Constitución Española''': La Constitución se fundamenta en la indisoluble unidad de la Nación española, patria común e indivisible de todos los españoles, y reconoce y garantiza el derecho a la autonomía de las nacionalidades y regiones que la integran y la solidaridad entre todas ellas''. ('''Article 2 of the Spanish Constitution''': The Constitution is based on the indissoluble unity of the Spanish Nation, common and indivisible homeland of all Spanish, and recognizes and guarantees the right to autonomy of nationalities and regions which comprise and solidarity among them.)<br /> ::Therefore, the Constitution accepts the existence of &quot;nationalities&quot;, but aggregated into a single Nation, the Spanish. As a result, the Constitutional Court ruled that the designation as a nation that does the Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia (2006) in its preamble has no legal validity. I read Wikipedia on''nationality''not worth me because, as one librarian said of this encyclopedia to me once, Wikipedia is not Wikipedia's reference.<br /> ::In any case, this debate is sterile because the article has already been corrected by someone, replacing &quot;nation&quot; with &quot;nationality.&quot;</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Catalonia&diff=373232404 2010-07-13T10:01:37Z

<p>Arkarull: /* Catalonia is not a nation (at least legally) but a historical nationality. */</p> <hr /> <div>{{Skip to talk}}<br /> {{Talk header|search=yes}}<br /> {{Off topic warning}}<br /> {{Controversial3}}<br /> {{WikiProject Spain|class=c|importance=top}}<br /> {{WikiProject Catalan-speaker|class=c|importance=top}}<br /> {{OnThisDay|date1=2004-09-11|oldid1=9955831}}<br /> {{auto archiving notice|bot=MiszaBot|age=30|dounreplied=yes}}<br /> {{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn<br /> |target=Talk:Catalonia/Archive index<br /> |mask=Talk:Catalonia/Archive &lt;#&gt;<br /> |leading_zeros=0<br /> |indexhere=yes}}<br /> {{User:MiszaBot/config<br /> |archiveheader = {{aan}}<br /> |maxarchivesize = 200K<br /> |counter = 5<br /> |minthreadsleft = 10<br /> |minthreadstoarchive = 1<br /> |algo = old(30d)<br /> |archive = Talk:Catalonia/Archive %(counter)d<br /> }}<br /> <br /> == Catalonia definition must me corrected ==<br /> <br /> We must differentiate between geographic and politics definition.<br /> Catalonia is a geographical area comprising actual Catalan Community in Spain and Cerdanya which actually is the french department of Pyrinèes Oriental. If there is any reference to Catalonia as a nation, it must cover all Catalonia and not merely the Catalan Community of Spain.<br /> Both populations consider theirselves Catalans sharing the same Catalan language, (even it is not considered an official language in France because political assumptions) whith respect for each political nationality, french or spanish. <br /> <br /> The definition must be considered as follows:<br /> <br /> ''Catalonia Community covers an area of 32,114 km² and has an official population of 7,210,508[1]. It borders Cerdanya in France and Andorra to the north, Aragon to the west, the Valencian Community to the south, and the Mediterranean Sea to the east (580 km coastline). Official languages are Catalan, Spanish and Aranese.''<br /> <br /> I understand that the separatist ideas of some french and spanish nationalism against the European Union cultural heritage must be erradicated if we want the wikipedia project to progress.<br /> <br /> :I'm sorry but I must disagree with you. There is another concept for the whole catalan-speaking territories and it is [[Catalan Countries]].<br /> :Catalonia's definition is being discussed in the section above (for a long time).--[[User:Civit cardona|Civit cardona]] ([[User talk:Civit cardona|talk]]) 14:04, 15 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> I struggle to believe that Perpignan in France should only be counted as &quot;Catalan speaking&quot;. They fly the Catalan flag, it's historically and cultural strongly Catalan, and the Rugby League team (which should also be mentioned and linked in the article) is called Catalan Dragons. In Catalan the area is called Northern Catalonia. <br /> <br /> I'm sure this is a controversial issue whatever is included in the article, but ignoring Northern Catalonia in the article completely strikes me as a whitewash and not a neutral POV. [[User:Davini994|Davini994]] ([[User talk:Davini994|talk]]) 10:22, 3 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :This article is hijacked by some editors near to spanish unionist positions. I do agree with you that not speaking about the Catalan nation and what and where is North Catalonia is simply a failure of reflecting the Catalan reality. If the article is only speaking about the autonomous community then it should be called 'Autonomous Community of Catalonia'[[Special:Contributions/95.61.18.160|95.61.18.160]] ([[User talk:95.61.18.160|talk]]) 19:09, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Flag of Catalonia ==<br /> <br /> I think that there are some problems with that sentence: &quot;The flag of Catalonia or ''[[Senyera]]'' (''flag'' in [[Catalan language|Catalan]]), is a [[vexillological symbol]] based on the [[coat of arms]] of the [[Crown of Aragon]], which consists of four red stripes on a golden background. It is an official symbol since the Statute of Catalonia of 1932.&quot; The flag was an heraldic emblem of Counts of Barcelona before being in the Crown of Aragon.--[[User:Vilarrubla|Vilar]] 22:48, 19 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Since both claims are correct, next time, instead than removing a correct fact from an article (i.e: &quot;based on the [[coat of arms]] of the [[Crown of Aragon]]&quot;), you should, if willing to add your POV, limit yourself to add to that sentence a &quot;and of the counts of barcelona&quot; instead than erasing the content (which is also fully referenced). --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 01:18, 20 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> ::I have not erased anything and that was not fully referenced. The reference #46 says: &quot;The flag of Catalonia, which is the traditional flag with four red stripes on a yellow background, shall be present on public buildings and during official acts held in Catalonia.&quot; and I don't see anything about Crown of Aragon or Counts of Barcelona in that reference. --[[User:Vilarrubla|Vilar]] 10:45, 20 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == The map ==<br /> <br /> Carles, noticing your last [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=302485241&amp;oldid=302474758 edit], I just want to point you that each and every other article about CCAA has the vectorial map (just take a look yourself). If we want to keep some equality and sense around wikipedia, the correct thing is to leave the other one. there is no real reasons for this article to be the exemption. My thoughts only. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 22:40, 16 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Sorry, Maurice, I beg to disagree. At least the maps for the Valencian Community and the Balearic Islands have also been changed today (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Valencian_Community&amp;diff=302475380&amp;oldid=302426446] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Balearic_Islands&amp;diff=302472767&amp;oldid=302008420]) to this kind of Spain-centered map. So the situation is not like you seem to describe: the map in Catalonia article being a unique strange singularity to be corrected with respect to a long well-established tradition in all the remaining communities. No. The fact is that just now some people propose this new solution. We can discuss it, of course. My initial point is that I prefer the maps those communities have had for a long time because they are more globally-minded and show their position not only inside Spain, but also in a European context. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 23:09, 16 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::Sadly, like so many other times, it is not a point of what we do prefer, but to continue the path followed by the majority of the other articles. Let's not forget that this article is part of an encyclopedia, and as such, all related articles must follow the same guidelines. If you take a look at all the articles about CCAA. Like it or not, the vectorial map seems to be the prefered by all the editors involved in the majority of all those articles. If you take a look at the portuguese districts([[Braga (district)]], [[Bragança (district)]], [[Faro (district)]], [[Lisboa (district)]]...), the french regions ([[Alsace]], [[Champagne-Ardenne]], [Bourgogne]], [[Nord-Pas-de-Calais]], [[Pays de la Loire]], [[Rhône-Alpes]]...) or the italian italian regions ([[Abruzzo]], [[Calabria]], [[Lazio]], [[Marche]], [[Sardinia]], [[Tuscany]]...), you will notice that they all do share the same maps and that are always &quot;country-centered&quot; (if I may say so). Having different types of maps depending on the region selected is in my opinion undesirable.<br /> <br /> ::That said, I believe that the correct thing is to implement the map used by the majority of the articles CCAA-related. In addition, let's not forget that this is this the english wikipedia, and as such, it is like the &quot;international version&quot; of it. If some user from Indonesia wants to learn about a CCAA (let's say Catalonia in this particular case) you can bet for sure he might be much more interested to understand where it is placed in relation to the rest of the country than in relation to Europe.<br /> <br /> ::I think that those are the 2 most important reasons to keep the vectorial map. If someday, Europe really becomes something close enough to a united country, then your position of an europen-minded map should be the one to follow... But only if that is the position for all the articles in wikipedia related to europen regions... Cheers. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 17:45, 17 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::Thanks for your explanation, Maurice, and sorry for my late reply (I am back from holidays just now). I agree with you that homogeneity is good in general, but I'm still not sure whether it constitutes a sufficient reason for the change you propose. I haven't seen any wiki policy enforcing this uniformity, although I agree with you that it is desirable. But, actually, there would be a way to make both of us happy, i.e. to preserve both good properties at once (global-minded maps and homogeneity): uploading maps like those we had during the last years for the Catalan-speaking communities also for the remaining Spanish autonomous communities, right? This is my proposal. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 08:51, 19 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::::I thought you were on vacations... Hope you enjoyed them! I don't mind your proposal but, do you know how to create maps? Because I don't. If nobody uploads those maps for the rest of the CCAA, we get back to start. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 09:49, 19 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::Yes, I've enjoyed them a lot, thanks! :) Good to see that you are open to a proposal that would solve both of our concern at once. As regards to the maps, this seems to completely feasible. I am checking that those files already exist: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Andaluc%C3%ADa.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Extremadura.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Castilla-La_Mancha.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Castilla_y_Le%C3%B3n.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_la_Comunidad_de_Madrid.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Galicia.png], etc. (you see the pattern). So homogeneity is not really a problem. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 10:34, 20 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Hi there Carles. Long time no see. <br /> <br /> I wanted to make you reconsider your position about keeping the european centered maps. For almost one year(?), you have been defending those maps against (quite a lot now) changes by multiple editors to the one used in the rest of CCAA related articles. We already discussed this matter long time ago (uniformity in wikipedia articles, the country being more important than the continent...).<br /> <br /> You know I don't agree with your position, but for the sake of both of us I left your option. But now, you should admit that your opinion is probably a minority.<br /> <br /> Tell me what you think. Cheers. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 10:05, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi Maurice! Nice to meet you here again. Hope you're doing fine.<br /> :I don't completely agree with your analysis of the situation. First, those maps are not my invention. They were already in stable versions of the entries when I joined the project, more than two years ago. Second, after a quick check on the history of the entry on [[Catalonia]], I've counted only four users changing the map to the Spanish-centered one since we discussed the issue. And none of them, unlike you, has bothered to write a single line on the talk page to state their points for the change. On the other hand, there has been one user who has proposed a [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mapa_de_localitzaci%C3%B3_a_les_comarques_catalanes.svg Catalan-centered map] which, coherently with my globally-minded approach, I don't like and I don't support. Therefore, I don't think that &quot;lonely Carles fighting against a majority of users who argue for a Spain-centered map&quot; is a faithful account of the situation, because they are few, they hardly argue, and there have even been proposals in a different direction. In this discussion, we made our positions quite clear. Let me remind my points:<br /> :* The main thing here is to offer an accurate map (faithful to both geographical and political reality) and as informative as possible to help readers from all over the world to locate these regions.<br /> :* In particular, the maps should clearly show the administrative borders of the autonomous communities, their position inside Spain (for they belong to this sovereign state, and nowadays sovereign states are the key element in geopolitical divisions), and their position in a wider context to give the maximum information to non-European readers. All of this can be achieved with the pictures I've been defending.<br /> :* Homogeneity with entries about other regions is certainly a good value to pursue and, as I already showed, it does not contradict any point above, because we already have in Commons maps of this kind (showing both Spanish and European context) for all the remaining Spanish regions.<br /> :--[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera#top|talk]]) 11:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Carles, all the autonomies of Spain have the same map. I understand that you are independentist but this it is not motive for including a map where you cannot see the whole country. I am sorry, but it isn't logical to include a map different to the rest. [[User:Diplomatiko|Diplomatiko]] ([[User talk:Diplomatiko|talk]]) 14:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi, Diplomatiko. Many thanks for joining the discussion. I would like to kindly ask you a couple of things. First, it would help the discussion a lot, if you would read carefully what has been said so far. In particular, you'll find a specific proposal dealing with the uniformity problem you are concerned with. Second, I would appreciate it very much if you would abstain from making assumptions on other users personal views. It doesn't really help the discussion (after all, personal opinions of the editors do not matter much when we are trying to produce a neutral text), and sometimes (this is the case now) you can be misled to wrong conclusions: I am not an independentist (not even a nationalist), as it can be easily seen in the userboxes in my webpage. Anyway, we can forget about this, because talk pages are not meant to discuss about any user, but about the article in question and to decide how to collectively improve it. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 14:50, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :I see you are taking your time to think about it. Fair enough. In the meantime, I shall restore the previous consensual map. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 10:19, 25 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> I'm restoring the regular map (the one which all the other articles use). There's no reason to use another map: NUTS maps don't offer an enough clear sight of a country subdivision location. Furthermore, this (and sometimes the Valencian Community one, for obvious reasons...) is the only country subdivision article in the entire Wikipedia where they're used. [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 21:01, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi Icallbs. Thanks for your comments. But, have you bothered to read the discussion above where I showed that your concerns on homogeneity in Spanish regions entries are compatible with my concerns for globality for non-Spanish readers? Please take a look at it. On the other hand, let me remind that prior to changing a disputed content, you should reach consensus, not the other way around as you have done know (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus#Consensus-building]). Cheers, --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:51, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Maybe you misunderstood &quot;NUTS&quot;. [[NUTS of Spain|These]] are the Spanish NUTS regions, in which the map you use is based. <br /> <br /> :: I've read that discussion, and I must say those maps aren't suitable at all in this kind of articles. They just aren't, just have a look at France's subdivisions articles, or Italy's, or Portugal's, or Poland's. Sadly, I think those &quot;concerns&quot; aren't really &quot;for globality&quot;. Exaxtly because non-Spanish users are the ones who will be reading this, they'll the ones the maps should be adressed to. I encourage you to read the consesus-building article you pointed before for the further seeking of a common point. Other users like MauritiusXIII can help us improving these aspects too. In the meantime, probably the regular map is the better option because of the homogeneity. Also, I'd like you to consider Dr01drpny's option, it's the same map as the rest of Spain's regions and it has the globality element.<br /> <br /> :: [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 18:45, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi. I combined both maps to try to fulfill both concerns regarding homogeneity and wider region location inside Europe. You can add it to the article if you agree with it: [[:File:Localització de Catalunya.png]]. Cheers. --[[User:Dr01drpny|Dr01drpny]] ([[User talk:Dr01drpny|talk]]) 23:45, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi there. Thank you very much, Dr01drpny, for your input. That moves towards the good direction to resolve the dispute, indeed. As for Icallbs, first let me say I'm sorry for having misunderstood the &quot;NUTS&quot; thing; I didn't know that concept. Thank you for pointing it out. However, you might want to apologize as well for assuming bad faith in me when you write &quot;I think those concerns aren't really for globality&quot;. I am proud to claim that all my contributions to Wikipedia (both in articles and in talk pages) are openly honest and faithful to my points of view; it would certainly be stupid to act otherwise when I am editing under my real name. So, this frank globality concern is starting to be addressed by Dr01drpny in his proposal, and I have tentatively tried how it looks in the article. I would like to ask him, since he looks very deft in map creation, to propose some other solutions which could make the European map bigger (now it is too hard to see). An easy solution is to increase the box on the right-bottom corner (there is some space on the sea and Africa that could be covered without problems). A better one would be to create something analogous to the maps used in [[Scotland]], [[Wales]] or [[England]], where the European map is the main one while the whole state (the UK in this case) is also shown in the box, which seems to be something of the highest importance to some users. After seeing (some of) these possibilities we could decide which is the nicest and most suitable for these articles. Needless to say, to satisfy the urge for homogeneity in Spanish autonomous communities articles, the new kind of map will have to be produced for each of them. Looking forward to hearing from all of you, --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:31, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Hi there. I agree with the idea of having a wider (Europe / World) localization map, especially for people from other countries. Still, there are some users who want homogeneity with the maps of all the other regions of Spain. Creating a new version of all these maps is a notable effort, and it would require a deeper consensus (currently the map is being changed almost every day). Maybe something to talk about in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Spain | WikiProject Spain]]. In the meanwhile I uploaded an updated version of the file with a bigger Europe map as Cnoguera asked. You can see the preview [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 | here]. --[[User:Dr01drpny|Dr01drpny]] ([[User talk:Dr01drpny|talk]]) 23:34, 6 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi, thanks again for you valuable help. That one is better indeed, but I still think that something like the UK maps would be even better (both having a clear depiction of the whole state administrative structure, as required by Maurice and Icallbs, and nice big global maps for a globally-minded English encyclopedia as seen e.g. in the UK entries). I suggest to explore that possibility before taking any decision. I understand the non-trivial effort the whole thing requires (and I truly thank you for your excellent technical help), but there certainly are strong concerns about homogeneity by several users, as you can see in the discussion above. As far as I am concerned, as a member of the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Catalan-speaking_Countries]], at least I'll work to have a uniform solution for the three articles under its scope. Sadly enough, while we are fruitfully discussing the issue here, some users like [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/79.153.124.250 this anonymous IP] keep trying to impose their point of view without bothering to contribute to the consensus building. I've already warned him about it. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:38, 7 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :However, if it is too difficult to produce these alternative maps, I suggest to go for the easiest solution and stick to the good old NUTS maps. Moreover there seems to be [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Basque_Country_%28autonomous_community%29#Edit_war_around_locator_map agreement on that elsewhere].--[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 15:27, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: That example doesn't suits our particular case... The country-centered map in that example just sucks! Portugal and France don't even appear. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 19:04, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Oh, yes. You're right, now I see it. I assumed, reasonably, that this discussion in [[Talk:Basque Country (autonomous community)]] was analogous to ours because there actually was an identical edit war proposing the same kind of map. But now I see that the discussion is strangely ignoring that one and proposing an ugly Spain-centered map where the country looks like an island... --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 19:46, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Like an island? Have you seen the German, French, Italian, Portuguese, or basically any other country subdivision article other than the British ones to use world maps for locating a region? It's stupid! Furthermore, the current map shows Portugal, the French border and even North Africa, which is much more than many (probably more than any other but the UK's constituent COUNTRIES [see what I did there?] articles). In the discussion you pointed at, there were only two votes... That's not a &quot;long-standing consensus&quot; nor it shows a reasonable solution. I'm sorry if I've been a bit rough in this comment, but these attempts to vandalize Wikipedia (specially the English one, cause it's the one millions of people from all countries, even non-English, read), trying to mislead them make me really upset. [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 20:34, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Yes, Icallbs, now you look upset indeed. Now you start referring to the proposals you don't like as &quot;stupid&quot; and to their defense as &quot;attempts to vandalize Wikipedia&quot; and &quot;trying to mislead&quot;... You know? it's a bad sign when one needs to use derogative terms to undermine the opponent's position in the discussion. But if you count to ten, take a deep breath, sit back and then read carefully the stuff above again, you'll realize what's written isn't that stupid after all. First, you'll see that the Spain-centered map where the country looks like an island I was referring to is, in fact, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_Comunidad_Vasca.png this one], and the island metaphor was already used in [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Basque_Country_(autonomous_community)#Edit_war_around_locator_map that discussion]. Second, you'll see I only attracted your attention to the Basque Country thing becauses it does resemble the discussion we currently having here, so it might be relevant. Third, you'll see I never described as a &quot;long-standing consensus&quot; what they have there, but I only said that &quot;there SEEMS to be an agreement&quot; there (and it really looks like that, when nobody has expressed any opinion against the NUTS map in that discussion thread; interestingly not even yourself after [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Basque_Country_(autonomous_community)&amp;diff=348810628&amp;oldid=348794880 you added the map you want]).<br /> :The discussion here is certainly far from being over. We are still waiting for new options from Dr01drpny or any other user able to produce them. So I wasn't restoring the NUTS maps (and BTW those are the really long-standing ones as a matter of fact in the Valencian Community, Balearic Islands and Catalonia entries) because of an alleged achievement of a new consensus. I was doing it because otherwise, when the map you like is there, some people seem to completely forget about the discussion and disappear for days. Interestingly enough, they suddenly come back when I restore the previous solution (sometimes yourself, sometimes some mysterious IPs which give little to none explanation for their edits). And, symmetrically, I could as well object that your putting back there the state-centered map is not fair before a decision is reached. But I won't, because my intention is already fulfilled by having people interested again in the discussion, which is the main issue here. Let us proceed then. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 09:51, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> * Please, don't mess this discussion here with the rest of the Autonomous Communities'. IF and only IF there is a general Wikipedia guideline regarding this issue, you can discuss other articles. Otherwise, keep it as a per article discussion and don't change other articles in which you are NOT involved, as the BAC one. We had our own discussion there and reached our own consensus. BTW, I don't get the &quot;goodness&quot; of that island-like map. It's geographical projection is not adequate for representing Spain, nor it does represent accurate detailed maps for each AC, as the green ones do. And again, these maps were replaced recently by anonymous users, probably to match them with the maps used in the Spanish Wiki, that may be are not the most accurate ones, you know. [[User:Deibid|David]] ([[User talk:Deibid|talk]]) 14:49, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: It is that &quot;IF&quot; precisely which I've been looking for weeks! Can't find anything... but I'm sure there is a guideline for these cases. If we find a guideline, we got the solution... I've tried quite a few wikiprojects but nothing... Any ideas, anyone? --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 19:47, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::As an outside observer who has occasionally reverted the wilder changes here ... I get confused exactly which map is which now, but FWIW I think the map should be clear in showing both where Catalonia is within Spain, and also where it is in the context of the wider European area. I'm not sure [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;oldid=352701357 this] version - the current one as I write - does that. It's too close-up, in the main part. I personally prefer the one [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 here], which I think was put together more recently. If you look for example at ones in respect of the UK, eg for [[Wales]] or [[Scotland]], they're even more &quot;global&quot; in perspective. In addition, there should ultimately be consistency across all the Spanish region/nation articles. &lt;small&gt;'''[[User:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;navy&quot;&gt;N-HH&lt;/font&gt;]]''' '''[[User talk:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]/[[Special:Contributions/N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;edits&lt;/font&gt;]]'''&lt;/small&gt; 14:56, 29 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 this version] is clearly the most desirable one. It has what all of us find important on a map. But we do lack of all the other maps for the rest of the Autonomous Communities. If someone knows how to add the small european map on the rest of them (and willing to), the problem is solved. I already tried to some days ago, but to manipulate svg's is beyond my comprehension... ;) --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 07:40, 30 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Catalan vs. Catalonian ==<br /> <br /> Most of the article uses the word &quot;Catalan&quot; as an English demonym adjective in almost all cases. The article even states in the infobox itself that the English demonym is &quot;Catalan&quot;. However, the section on popular culture uses the demonym &quot;Catalonian&quot;. Which is correct, if any? Either the references to &quot;Catalonian&quot; need to be changed to &quot;Catalan&quot; or, alternatively, &quot;Catalonian&quot; should be recognised as a possible demonym. [[User:Madeinsane|Madeinsane]] ([[User talk:Madeinsane|talk]]) 18:57, 13 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> You're right. 'Catalonian' is incorrect, or at least not as correct as 'Catalan'. I've removed the former from the article. That said, the entire section on popular culture needs clearing up. It is very badly written and might also be split to a new page. Any thoughts? --[[User:Tomclarke|Tomclarke]] ([[User talk:Tomclarke|talk]]) 15:15, 20 October 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Goth-Alania &gt; Catalonia ==<br /> <br /> &quot;...the name of the Spanish province Catalonia, which is but a slight deformation of Goth-Alania, &quot;province of the Goths and Alans&quot;...&quot; (from ''Alans'', Encyclopaedia Iranica) http://www.iranica.com/newsite/index.isc?Article=http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/unicode/v1f8/v1f8a013.html [[User:Böri|Böri]] ([[User talk:Böri|talk]]) 14:12, 25 December 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> --This is not true at all, just a fantasy theory, the name Catalonia probably comes from Gothalunda/Gothland &gt; Catalunya or from Castelans(people who lives in castles)&gt; Castelunya &gt; Catalunya <br /> --[[Special:Contributions/79.159.194.238|79.159.194.238]] ([[User talk:79.159.194.238|talk]]) 17:11, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == What ''is'' a nation, anyway? ==<br /> <br /> If you seek the answer to this question in ordinary English dictionaries, you’ll find entries like this:<br /> <br /> :a large aggregate of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular country or territory ''(Oxford New American Dictionary)''<br /> or<br /> :... '''1''' a body of people associated with a particular territory, that is sufficiently conscious of its unity to seek or to possess a government peculiarly its own ''(Webster’s Encyclopedic Dictionary)''<br /> <br /> or<br /> <br /> :... '''2''' a community of persons not constituting a state but bound by common descent, language, history, etc. ''(Collins English Dictionary)''<br /> <br /> So are Wikipedia editors entitled to describe Catalonia as a nation? On the basis of the foregoing, clearly they are. And what about the Spanish Constitutional Court? Well, neither they nor any other institution or legislature have any business to dictate English usage. Many editors (particularly some who are not native English speakers) have failed to take account of this fact. When the term “nation” is used in the context of Catalonia’s legal status, we need to make it quite clear in what sense it’s being used.<br /> <br /> Let me hasten to add that the foregoing mustn’t be taken to imply that I’m supporting a Catalanist position here: that would be to fall into exactly the sort of confusion between linguistic usage and legal definition that I'm criticizing.<br /> <br /> == Recent edit warring ==<br /> <br /> Look, this back and forth edit warring isn't really helping anything. You guys need to discuss it here. As an outsider with no stake in this, could I clarify a few points and ask people to follow them up below? There seem to be three main issues here -<br /> <br /> ===Nation/region/nationality etc in the lead, post court case===<br /> <br /> Per the above section, I don't think anyone can argue against the idea Catalonia is a &quot;nation&quot; in the broadest sense of the word - in the same way that is is also a &quot;region&quot;, and &quot;area&quot; or whatever, as well as more formally an &quot;Autonomous Community&quot;. The Spanish Constitutional Court ruling would also seem - according to the [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/spain/7861118/Catalonia-can-call-itself-a-nation-rules-Spains-top-court.html Telegraph piece] being cited - to have now more formally confirmed/accepted the use of the term &quot;nation&quot; in the latest Statute of Autonomy. However, it seems that they are saying that precisely because it is simply a vague cultural term that does not have a &quot;legal value&quot; or constitutional implications - ie it's accurate, but not that significant. The issue at stake is what to highlight and prioritise in the lead, and I'm not sure that simply sourcing to the Telegraph piece helps. That article also describes Catalonia as a &quot;region&quot;, and it's not clear on what basis one term is being preferred here over any other. It seems to me that using more formally defined terminology, where the terms wiki-link to pages about terms as they are used in a Spanish context - ie as in [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;oldid=371840349 this version] - would be better.<br /> <br /> :I don't think this formula would work, because the list of Spain's &quot;constituent historical nationalities&quot; has never been laid out and, in any event, it would open a can of worms. One million pounds for those who try (and succeed on) it: would Navarre be part of the Basque nation? Is there a constituent nationality called Castile? If that's so, would Andalusia be part of it (it was part of Castile's Crown, after all..)? Etc, etc.<br /> <br /> :Nor can we accept, as some editor has pretended, that all of Spain's autonomous regions are nationalities. Madrid is an autonomous region, but neither a nation nor a nationality. The same goes for, let's say, Extremadura, Cantabria or Murcia. I'm sorry for being so blunt on the matter, but some of Spain's autonomous regions are nations whereas others are just that: regions. And we all know who's who on this.<br /> <br /> :The points are: <br /> <br /> ::(a) Catalonia's Autonomy Charter describes it as a nation (whether this is legally binding is of no importance: this is Wikipedia, not a constitutionalists' forum). This term ('nation') was sanctioned by (a) Catalonia's Parliament, (b) Spain's Parliament and (c) Catalonia's people in a referendum.<br /> <br /> ::(b) Spain's Constitutional Court has sanctioned its use (again: whether this is legally binding is of no importance: this is Wikipedia, not a constitutionalists' forum). <br /> <br /> ::(c) Countless English-language sources (and this is ''English'' Wikipedia, by the way) describe Catalonia as a nation. Those sources (for instance, The Daily Telegraph) can't be accused of any sort of nationalist leaning. Quite the contrary, as the Irish experience shows to us.<br /> <br /> [[User:Andreas Balart|Andreas Balart]] ([[User talk:Andreas Balart|talk]]) 08:27, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Order of languages===<br /> <br /> Is there a formal, agreed view in the real world of which of Catalan and Spanish is the &quot;main&quot; language, eg by virtue of official recognition as such within Catalonia and/or Spain as a whole, or are there official figures that reveal one language is more commonly spoken as a first language in Catalonia than the other? If so, the order should just follow that. If not, or there's no clear answer on those criteria, how about going by alphabetical order, ie Catalan first (although it would be slightly odd to apply this across all languages and put Aranese right at the top)?<br /> <br /> ===Parliament===<br /> <br /> It seems kind of obvious to me that the Parliament field in the infobox should refer to the Catalan parliament and link to that page, not to the national Spanish parliament. See [[Scotland]] for example.<br /> <br /> Anyway, those are my thoughts, if they help. There's plenty else that needs improving with the rest of the article, and genuine vandalism seems to slip by unnoticed while all this gets edit warred over. --&lt;small&gt;'''[[User:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;navy&quot;&gt;N-HH&lt;/font&gt;]]''' '''[[User talk:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]/[[Special:Contributions/N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;edits&lt;/font&gt;]]'''&lt;/small&gt; 15:23, 5 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Dear '''N-HH''',<br /> <br /> :If anything this point demostrates the sort of people who've hijacked and taken over this article over the last months and years, masquerading their byass as ''consensus'': they were actually ''so'' byassed that they '''deleted any reference''' to Catalonia's Parliament on Catalonia's infobox. It beggars belief.<br /> <br /> :We can put it down to a whole set of prejudices. Otherwise, it is rather difficult to understand this behaviour.<br /> <br /> :For too many months, I've been watching over it. But enough is enough. <br /> <br /> :[[User:Andreas Balart|Andreas Balart]] ([[User talk:Andreas Balart|talk]]) 08:32, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Automate archiving? ==<br /> <br /> Does anyone object to me setting up automatic archiving for this page using MiszaBot? Unless otherwise agreed, I would set it to archive threads that have been inactive for 30 days and keep ten threads.--[[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] ([[User talk:Oneiros|talk]]) 20:43, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :{{done}}--[[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] ([[User talk:Oneiros|talk]]) 13:47, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Spain high court rules against &quot;nation&quot; term ==<br /> <br /> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100710/ap_on_re_eu/eu_spain_catalan_charter &lt;span style=&quot;font-size: smaller;&quot; class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/75.85.14.106|75.85.14.106]] ([[User talk:75.85.14.106|talk]]) 02:14, 11 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;!-- Template:UnsignedIP --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;<br /> <br /> :No credit shoud be paid to anonymous vandalist comments<br /> :[[User:Eva Grossjean|Eva Grossjean]] ([[User talk:Eva Grossjean|talk]]) 14:11, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> ::Wikipedia is about speaking from the facts, not only from part of the political POV or from the legal POV (legal but not moral as the decisions of Spanish Constitutional Court are more than discussed). Anyone at Catalonia knows a significant part of the people living there feels that part of Spain as a nation with right of self-governing and any source considered trustable should reflect that. Any editor not trusting this can search about the Catalan display on this 11th July and will see that spanish high court is simply applying a centralist POV. BR anonymous. [[Special:Contributions/95.61.18.160|95.61.18.160]] ([[User talk:95.61.18.160|talk]]) 19:00, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Catalonia is not a nation (at least legally) but a historical nationality. ==<br /> <br /> Spain's Constitutional Court accepts the definition as nation for Catalonia but has no legal value. For legal purposes is still considered a historical nationality and in any case should not be included within the framework of political status. Catalonia is only an autonomous region of Spain. &lt;small&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Arkarull|Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Arkarull|contribs]]) 13:54, 12 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/small&gt;&lt;!-- Template:Unsigned --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;<br /> <br /> <br /> :Spain's constitutional Court is not the only POV ,and obviously is an interested POV. It is internationally accepted that part of the Catalan population feels Catalonia as a nation. It is a case very similar to Quebec so no such debate makes sense. The spanish constituional court is just an interested part in the conflict.[[Special:Contributions/95.61.18.160|95.61.18.160]] ([[User talk:95.61.18.160|talk]]) 19:03, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::For an encyclopedia the only valid POV is the legal POV, and in Spain the Constituctional Court's decissions are definitives. If Wikipedia doesn't respect that, a lot of other articles must be corrected. Scotland, for example, is only a historical country of United Kingdom or is a nation? I am Spanish but I respect the Catalan nationalism, as it has perfect historical foundations, and I think they are a nation, of course, but include social or personal POV in a section intended to the political situation, whatever it is, for better or for worse, is not encyclopedic. [[Special:Contributions/Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]]) 12:00, 13 July 2010 (UTC)</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Catalonia&diff=373232328 2010-07-13T10:00:45Z

<p>Arkarull: /* Catalonia is not a nation (at least legally) but a historical nationality. */</p> <hr /> <div>{{Skip to talk}}<br /> {{Talk header|search=yes}}<br /> {{Off topic warning}}<br /> {{Controversial3}}<br /> {{WikiProject Spain|class=c|importance=top}}<br /> {{WikiProject Catalan-speaker|class=c|importance=top}}<br /> {{OnThisDay|date1=2004-09-11|oldid1=9955831}}<br /> {{auto archiving notice|bot=MiszaBot|age=30|dounreplied=yes}}<br /> {{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn<br /> |target=Talk:Catalonia/Archive index<br /> |mask=Talk:Catalonia/Archive &lt;#&gt;<br /> |leading_zeros=0<br /> |indexhere=yes}}<br /> {{User:MiszaBot/config<br /> |archiveheader = {{aan}}<br /> |maxarchivesize = 200K<br /> |counter = 5<br /> |minthreadsleft = 10<br /> |minthreadstoarchive = 1<br /> |algo = old(30d)<br /> |archive = Talk:Catalonia/Archive %(counter)d<br /> }}<br /> <br /> == Catalonia definition must me corrected ==<br /> <br /> We must differentiate between geographic and politics definition.<br /> Catalonia is a geographical area comprising actual Catalan Community in Spain and Cerdanya which actually is the french department of Pyrinèes Oriental. If there is any reference to Catalonia as a nation, it must cover all Catalonia and not merely the Catalan Community of Spain.<br /> Both populations consider theirselves Catalans sharing the same Catalan language, (even it is not considered an official language in France because political assumptions) whith respect for each political nationality, french or spanish. <br /> <br /> The definition must be considered as follows:<br /> <br /> ''Catalonia Community covers an area of 32,114 km² and has an official population of 7,210,508[1]. It borders Cerdanya in France and Andorra to the north, Aragon to the west, the Valencian Community to the south, and the Mediterranean Sea to the east (580 km coastline). Official languages are Catalan, Spanish and Aranese.''<br /> <br /> I understand that the separatist ideas of some french and spanish nationalism against the European Union cultural heritage must be erradicated if we want the wikipedia project to progress.<br /> <br /> :I'm sorry but I must disagree with you. There is another concept for the whole catalan-speaking territories and it is [[Catalan Countries]].<br /> :Catalonia's definition is being discussed in the section above (for a long time).--[[User:Civit cardona|Civit cardona]] ([[User talk:Civit cardona|talk]]) 14:04, 15 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> I struggle to believe that Perpignan in France should only be counted as &quot;Catalan speaking&quot;. They fly the Catalan flag, it's historically and cultural strongly Catalan, and the Rugby League team (which should also be mentioned and linked in the article) is called Catalan Dragons. In Catalan the area is called Northern Catalonia. <br /> <br /> I'm sure this is a controversial issue whatever is included in the article, but ignoring Northern Catalonia in the article completely strikes me as a whitewash and not a neutral POV. [[User:Davini994|Davini994]] ([[User talk:Davini994|talk]]) 10:22, 3 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :This article is hijacked by some editors near to spanish unionist positions. I do agree with you that not speaking about the Catalan nation and what and where is North Catalonia is simply a failure of reflecting the Catalan reality. If the article is only speaking about the autonomous community then it should be called 'Autonomous Community of Catalonia'[[Special:Contributions/95.61.18.160|95.61.18.160]] ([[User talk:95.61.18.160|talk]]) 19:09, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Flag of Catalonia ==<br /> <br /> I think that there are some problems with that sentence: &quot;The flag of Catalonia or ''[[Senyera]]'' (''flag'' in [[Catalan language|Catalan]]), is a [[vexillological symbol]] based on the [[coat of arms]] of the [[Crown of Aragon]], which consists of four red stripes on a golden background. It is an official symbol since the Statute of Catalonia of 1932.&quot; The flag was an heraldic emblem of Counts of Barcelona before being in the Crown of Aragon.--[[User:Vilarrubla|Vilar]] 22:48, 19 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Since both claims are correct, next time, instead than removing a correct fact from an article (i.e: &quot;based on the [[coat of arms]] of the [[Crown of Aragon]]&quot;), you should, if willing to add your POV, limit yourself to add to that sentence a &quot;and of the counts of barcelona&quot; instead than erasing the content (which is also fully referenced). --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 01:18, 20 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> ::I have not erased anything and that was not fully referenced. The reference #46 says: &quot;The flag of Catalonia, which is the traditional flag with four red stripes on a yellow background, shall be present on public buildings and during official acts held in Catalonia.&quot; and I don't see anything about Crown of Aragon or Counts of Barcelona in that reference. --[[User:Vilarrubla|Vilar]] 10:45, 20 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == The map ==<br /> <br /> Carles, noticing your last [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=302485241&amp;oldid=302474758 edit], I just want to point you that each and every other article about CCAA has the vectorial map (just take a look yourself). If we want to keep some equality and sense around wikipedia, the correct thing is to leave the other one. there is no real reasons for this article to be the exemption. My thoughts only. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 22:40, 16 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Sorry, Maurice, I beg to disagree. At least the maps for the Valencian Community and the Balearic Islands have also been changed today (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Valencian_Community&amp;diff=302475380&amp;oldid=302426446] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Balearic_Islands&amp;diff=302472767&amp;oldid=302008420]) to this kind of Spain-centered map. So the situation is not like you seem to describe: the map in Catalonia article being a unique strange singularity to be corrected with respect to a long well-established tradition in all the remaining communities. No. The fact is that just now some people propose this new solution. We can discuss it, of course. My initial point is that I prefer the maps those communities have had for a long time because they are more globally-minded and show their position not only inside Spain, but also in a European context. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 23:09, 16 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::Sadly, like so many other times, it is not a point of what we do prefer, but to continue the path followed by the majority of the other articles. Let's not forget that this article is part of an encyclopedia, and as such, all related articles must follow the same guidelines. If you take a look at all the articles about CCAA. Like it or not, the vectorial map seems to be the prefered by all the editors involved in the majority of all those articles. If you take a look at the portuguese districts([[Braga (district)]], [[Bragança (district)]], [[Faro (district)]], [[Lisboa (district)]]...), the french regions ([[Alsace]], [[Champagne-Ardenne]], [Bourgogne]], [[Nord-Pas-de-Calais]], [[Pays de la Loire]], [[Rhône-Alpes]]...) or the italian italian regions ([[Abruzzo]], [[Calabria]], [[Lazio]], [[Marche]], [[Sardinia]], [[Tuscany]]...), you will notice that they all do share the same maps and that are always &quot;country-centered&quot; (if I may say so). Having different types of maps depending on the region selected is in my opinion undesirable.<br /> <br /> ::That said, I believe that the correct thing is to implement the map used by the majority of the articles CCAA-related. In addition, let's not forget that this is this the english wikipedia, and as such, it is like the &quot;international version&quot; of it. If some user from Indonesia wants to learn about a CCAA (let's say Catalonia in this particular case) you can bet for sure he might be much more interested to understand where it is placed in relation to the rest of the country than in relation to Europe.<br /> <br /> ::I think that those are the 2 most important reasons to keep the vectorial map. If someday, Europe really becomes something close enough to a united country, then your position of an europen-minded map should be the one to follow... But only if that is the position for all the articles in wikipedia related to europen regions... Cheers. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 17:45, 17 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::Thanks for your explanation, Maurice, and sorry for my late reply (I am back from holidays just now). I agree with you that homogeneity is good in general, but I'm still not sure whether it constitutes a sufficient reason for the change you propose. I haven't seen any wiki policy enforcing this uniformity, although I agree with you that it is desirable. But, actually, there would be a way to make both of us happy, i.e. to preserve both good properties at once (global-minded maps and homogeneity): uploading maps like those we had during the last years for the Catalan-speaking communities also for the remaining Spanish autonomous communities, right? This is my proposal. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 08:51, 19 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::::I thought you were on vacations... Hope you enjoyed them! I don't mind your proposal but, do you know how to create maps? Because I don't. If nobody uploads those maps for the rest of the CCAA, we get back to start. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 09:49, 19 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::Yes, I've enjoyed them a lot, thanks! :) Good to see that you are open to a proposal that would solve both of our concern at once. As regards to the maps, this seems to completely feasible. I am checking that those files already exist: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Andaluc%C3%ADa.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Extremadura.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Castilla-La_Mancha.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Castilla_y_Le%C3%B3n.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_la_Comunidad_de_Madrid.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Galicia.png], etc. (you see the pattern). So homogeneity is not really a problem. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 10:34, 20 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Hi there Carles. Long time no see. <br /> <br /> I wanted to make you reconsider your position about keeping the european centered maps. For almost one year(?), you have been defending those maps against (quite a lot now) changes by multiple editors to the one used in the rest of CCAA related articles. We already discussed this matter long time ago (uniformity in wikipedia articles, the country being more important than the continent...).<br /> <br /> You know I don't agree with your position, but for the sake of both of us I left your option. But now, you should admit that your opinion is probably a minority.<br /> <br /> Tell me what you think. Cheers. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 10:05, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi Maurice! Nice to meet you here again. Hope you're doing fine.<br /> :I don't completely agree with your analysis of the situation. First, those maps are not my invention. They were already in stable versions of the entries when I joined the project, more than two years ago. Second, after a quick check on the history of the entry on [[Catalonia]], I've counted only four users changing the map to the Spanish-centered one since we discussed the issue. And none of them, unlike you, has bothered to write a single line on the talk page to state their points for the change. On the other hand, there has been one user who has proposed a [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mapa_de_localitzaci%C3%B3_a_les_comarques_catalanes.svg Catalan-centered map] which, coherently with my globally-minded approach, I don't like and I don't support. Therefore, I don't think that &quot;lonely Carles fighting against a majority of users who argue for a Spain-centered map&quot; is a faithful account of the situation, because they are few, they hardly argue, and there have even been proposals in a different direction. In this discussion, we made our positions quite clear. Let me remind my points:<br /> :* The main thing here is to offer an accurate map (faithful to both geographical and political reality) and as informative as possible to help readers from all over the world to locate these regions.<br /> :* In particular, the maps should clearly show the administrative borders of the autonomous communities, their position inside Spain (for they belong to this sovereign state, and nowadays sovereign states are the key element in geopolitical divisions), and their position in a wider context to give the maximum information to non-European readers. All of this can be achieved with the pictures I've been defending.<br /> :* Homogeneity with entries about other regions is certainly a good value to pursue and, as I already showed, it does not contradict any point above, because we already have in Commons maps of this kind (showing both Spanish and European context) for all the remaining Spanish regions.<br /> :--[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera#top|talk]]) 11:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Carles, all the autonomies of Spain have the same map. I understand that you are independentist but this it is not motive for including a map where you cannot see the whole country. I am sorry, but it isn't logical to include a map different to the rest. [[User:Diplomatiko|Diplomatiko]] ([[User talk:Diplomatiko|talk]]) 14:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi, Diplomatiko. Many thanks for joining the discussion. I would like to kindly ask you a couple of things. First, it would help the discussion a lot, if you would read carefully what has been said so far. In particular, you'll find a specific proposal dealing with the uniformity problem you are concerned with. Second, I would appreciate it very much if you would abstain from making assumptions on other users personal views. It doesn't really help the discussion (after all, personal opinions of the editors do not matter much when we are trying to produce a neutral text), and sometimes (this is the case now) you can be misled to wrong conclusions: I am not an independentist (not even a nationalist), as it can be easily seen in the userboxes in my webpage. Anyway, we can forget about this, because talk pages are not meant to discuss about any user, but about the article in question and to decide how to collectively improve it. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 14:50, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :I see you are taking your time to think about it. Fair enough. In the meantime, I shall restore the previous consensual map. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 10:19, 25 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> I'm restoring the regular map (the one which all the other articles use). There's no reason to use another map: NUTS maps don't offer an enough clear sight of a country subdivision location. Furthermore, this (and sometimes the Valencian Community one, for obvious reasons...) is the only country subdivision article in the entire Wikipedia where they're used. [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 21:01, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi Icallbs. Thanks for your comments. But, have you bothered to read the discussion above where I showed that your concerns on homogeneity in Spanish regions entries are compatible with my concerns for globality for non-Spanish readers? Please take a look at it. On the other hand, let me remind that prior to changing a disputed content, you should reach consensus, not the other way around as you have done know (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus#Consensus-building]). Cheers, --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:51, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Maybe you misunderstood &quot;NUTS&quot;. [[NUTS of Spain|These]] are the Spanish NUTS regions, in which the map you use is based. <br /> <br /> :: I've read that discussion, and I must say those maps aren't suitable at all in this kind of articles. They just aren't, just have a look at France's subdivisions articles, or Italy's, or Portugal's, or Poland's. Sadly, I think those &quot;concerns&quot; aren't really &quot;for globality&quot;. Exaxtly because non-Spanish users are the ones who will be reading this, they'll the ones the maps should be adressed to. I encourage you to read the consesus-building article you pointed before for the further seeking of a common point. Other users like MauritiusXIII can help us improving these aspects too. In the meantime, probably the regular map is the better option because of the homogeneity. Also, I'd like you to consider Dr01drpny's option, it's the same map as the rest of Spain's regions and it has the globality element.<br /> <br /> :: [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 18:45, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi. I combined both maps to try to fulfill both concerns regarding homogeneity and wider region location inside Europe. You can add it to the article if you agree with it: [[:File:Localització de Catalunya.png]]. Cheers. --[[User:Dr01drpny|Dr01drpny]] ([[User talk:Dr01drpny|talk]]) 23:45, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi there. Thank you very much, Dr01drpny, for your input. That moves towards the good direction to resolve the dispute, indeed. As for Icallbs, first let me say I'm sorry for having misunderstood the &quot;NUTS&quot; thing; I didn't know that concept. Thank you for pointing it out. However, you might want to apologize as well for assuming bad faith in me when you write &quot;I think those concerns aren't really for globality&quot;. I am proud to claim that all my contributions to Wikipedia (both in articles and in talk pages) are openly honest and faithful to my points of view; it would certainly be stupid to act otherwise when I am editing under my real name. So, this frank globality concern is starting to be addressed by Dr01drpny in his proposal, and I have tentatively tried how it looks in the article. I would like to ask him, since he looks very deft in map creation, to propose some other solutions which could make the European map bigger (now it is too hard to see). An easy solution is to increase the box on the right-bottom corner (there is some space on the sea and Africa that could be covered without problems). A better one would be to create something analogous to the maps used in [[Scotland]], [[Wales]] or [[England]], where the European map is the main one while the whole state (the UK in this case) is also shown in the box, which seems to be something of the highest importance to some users. After seeing (some of) these possibilities we could decide which is the nicest and most suitable for these articles. Needless to say, to satisfy the urge for homogeneity in Spanish autonomous communities articles, the new kind of map will have to be produced for each of them. Looking forward to hearing from all of you, --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:31, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Hi there. I agree with the idea of having a wider (Europe / World) localization map, especially for people from other countries. Still, there are some users who want homogeneity with the maps of all the other regions of Spain. Creating a new version of all these maps is a notable effort, and it would require a deeper consensus (currently the map is being changed almost every day). Maybe something to talk about in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Spain | WikiProject Spain]]. In the meanwhile I uploaded an updated version of the file with a bigger Europe map as Cnoguera asked. You can see the preview [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 | here]. --[[User:Dr01drpny|Dr01drpny]] ([[User talk:Dr01drpny|talk]]) 23:34, 6 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi, thanks again for you valuable help. That one is better indeed, but I still think that something like the UK maps would be even better (both having a clear depiction of the whole state administrative structure, as required by Maurice and Icallbs, and nice big global maps for a globally-minded English encyclopedia as seen e.g. in the UK entries). I suggest to explore that possibility before taking any decision. I understand the non-trivial effort the whole thing requires (and I truly thank you for your excellent technical help), but there certainly are strong concerns about homogeneity by several users, as you can see in the discussion above. As far as I am concerned, as a member of the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Catalan-speaking_Countries]], at least I'll work to have a uniform solution for the three articles under its scope. Sadly enough, while we are fruitfully discussing the issue here, some users like [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/79.153.124.250 this anonymous IP] keep trying to impose their point of view without bothering to contribute to the consensus building. I've already warned him about it. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:38, 7 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :However, if it is too difficult to produce these alternative maps, I suggest to go for the easiest solution and stick to the good old NUTS maps. Moreover there seems to be [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Basque_Country_%28autonomous_community%29#Edit_war_around_locator_map agreement on that elsewhere].--[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 15:27, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: That example doesn't suits our particular case... The country-centered map in that example just sucks! Portugal and France don't even appear. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 19:04, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Oh, yes. You're right, now I see it. I assumed, reasonably, that this discussion in [[Talk:Basque Country (autonomous community)]] was analogous to ours because there actually was an identical edit war proposing the same kind of map. But now I see that the discussion is strangely ignoring that one and proposing an ugly Spain-centered map where the country looks like an island... --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 19:46, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Like an island? Have you seen the German, French, Italian, Portuguese, or basically any other country subdivision article other than the British ones to use world maps for locating a region? It's stupid! Furthermore, the current map shows Portugal, the French border and even North Africa, which is much more than many (probably more than any other but the UK's constituent COUNTRIES [see what I did there?] articles). In the discussion you pointed at, there were only two votes... That's not a &quot;long-standing consensus&quot; nor it shows a reasonable solution. I'm sorry if I've been a bit rough in this comment, but these attempts to vandalize Wikipedia (specially the English one, cause it's the one millions of people from all countries, even non-English, read), trying to mislead them make me really upset. [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 20:34, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Yes, Icallbs, now you look upset indeed. Now you start referring to the proposals you don't like as &quot;stupid&quot; and to their defense as &quot;attempts to vandalize Wikipedia&quot; and &quot;trying to mislead&quot;... You know? it's a bad sign when one needs to use derogative terms to undermine the opponent's position in the discussion. But if you count to ten, take a deep breath, sit back and then read carefully the stuff above again, you'll realize what's written isn't that stupid after all. First, you'll see that the Spain-centered map where the country looks like an island I was referring to is, in fact, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_Comunidad_Vasca.png this one], and the island metaphor was already used in [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Basque_Country_(autonomous_community)#Edit_war_around_locator_map that discussion]. Second, you'll see I only attracted your attention to the Basque Country thing becauses it does resemble the discussion we currently having here, so it might be relevant. Third, you'll see I never described as a &quot;long-standing consensus&quot; what they have there, but I only said that &quot;there SEEMS to be an agreement&quot; there (and it really looks like that, when nobody has expressed any opinion against the NUTS map in that discussion thread; interestingly not even yourself after [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Basque_Country_(autonomous_community)&amp;diff=348810628&amp;oldid=348794880 you added the map you want]).<br /> :The discussion here is certainly far from being over. We are still waiting for new options from Dr01drpny or any other user able to produce them. So I wasn't restoring the NUTS maps (and BTW those are the really long-standing ones as a matter of fact in the Valencian Community, Balearic Islands and Catalonia entries) because of an alleged achievement of a new consensus. I was doing it because otherwise, when the map you like is there, some people seem to completely forget about the discussion and disappear for days. Interestingly enough, they suddenly come back when I restore the previous solution (sometimes yourself, sometimes some mysterious IPs which give little to none explanation for their edits). And, symmetrically, I could as well object that your putting back there the state-centered map is not fair before a decision is reached. But I won't, because my intention is already fulfilled by having people interested again in the discussion, which is the main issue here. Let us proceed then. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 09:51, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> * Please, don't mess this discussion here with the rest of the Autonomous Communities'. IF and only IF there is a general Wikipedia guideline regarding this issue, you can discuss other articles. Otherwise, keep it as a per article discussion and don't change other articles in which you are NOT involved, as the BAC one. We had our own discussion there and reached our own consensus. BTW, I don't get the &quot;goodness&quot; of that island-like map. It's geographical projection is not adequate for representing Spain, nor it does represent accurate detailed maps for each AC, as the green ones do. And again, these maps were replaced recently by anonymous users, probably to match them with the maps used in the Spanish Wiki, that may be are not the most accurate ones, you know. [[User:Deibid|David]] ([[User talk:Deibid|talk]]) 14:49, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: It is that &quot;IF&quot; precisely which I've been looking for weeks! Can't find anything... but I'm sure there is a guideline for these cases. If we find a guideline, we got the solution... I've tried quite a few wikiprojects but nothing... Any ideas, anyone? --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 19:47, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::As an outside observer who has occasionally reverted the wilder changes here ... I get confused exactly which map is which now, but FWIW I think the map should be clear in showing both where Catalonia is within Spain, and also where it is in the context of the wider European area. I'm not sure [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;oldid=352701357 this] version - the current one as I write - does that. It's too close-up, in the main part. I personally prefer the one [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 here], which I think was put together more recently. If you look for example at ones in respect of the UK, eg for [[Wales]] or [[Scotland]], they're even more &quot;global&quot; in perspective. In addition, there should ultimately be consistency across all the Spanish region/nation articles. &lt;small&gt;'''[[User:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;navy&quot;&gt;N-HH&lt;/font&gt;]]''' '''[[User talk:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]/[[Special:Contributions/N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;edits&lt;/font&gt;]]'''&lt;/small&gt; 14:56, 29 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 this version] is clearly the most desirable one. It has what all of us find important on a map. But we do lack of all the other maps for the rest of the Autonomous Communities. If someone knows how to add the small european map on the rest of them (and willing to), the problem is solved. I already tried to some days ago, but to manipulate svg's is beyond my comprehension... ;) --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 07:40, 30 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Catalan vs. Catalonian ==<br /> <br /> Most of the article uses the word &quot;Catalan&quot; as an English demonym adjective in almost all cases. The article even states in the infobox itself that the English demonym is &quot;Catalan&quot;. However, the section on popular culture uses the demonym &quot;Catalonian&quot;. Which is correct, if any? Either the references to &quot;Catalonian&quot; need to be changed to &quot;Catalan&quot; or, alternatively, &quot;Catalonian&quot; should be recognised as a possible demonym. [[User:Madeinsane|Madeinsane]] ([[User talk:Madeinsane|talk]]) 18:57, 13 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> You're right. 'Catalonian' is incorrect, or at least not as correct as 'Catalan'. I've removed the former from the article. That said, the entire section on popular culture needs clearing up. It is very badly written and might also be split to a new page. Any thoughts? --[[User:Tomclarke|Tomclarke]] ([[User talk:Tomclarke|talk]]) 15:15, 20 October 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Goth-Alania &gt; Catalonia ==<br /> <br /> &quot;...the name of the Spanish province Catalonia, which is but a slight deformation of Goth-Alania, &quot;province of the Goths and Alans&quot;...&quot; (from ''Alans'', Encyclopaedia Iranica) http://www.iranica.com/newsite/index.isc?Article=http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/unicode/v1f8/v1f8a013.html [[User:Böri|Böri]] ([[User talk:Böri|talk]]) 14:12, 25 December 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> --This is not true at all, just a fantasy theory, the name Catalonia probably comes from Gothalunda/Gothland &gt; Catalunya or from Castelans(people who lives in castles)&gt; Castelunya &gt; Catalunya <br /> --[[Special:Contributions/79.159.194.238|79.159.194.238]] ([[User talk:79.159.194.238|talk]]) 17:11, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == What ''is'' a nation, anyway? ==<br /> <br /> If you seek the answer to this question in ordinary English dictionaries, you’ll find entries like this:<br /> <br /> :a large aggregate of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular country or territory ''(Oxford New American Dictionary)''<br /> or<br /> :... '''1''' a body of people associated with a particular territory, that is sufficiently conscious of its unity to seek or to possess a government peculiarly its own ''(Webster’s Encyclopedic Dictionary)''<br /> <br /> or<br /> <br /> :... '''2''' a community of persons not constituting a state but bound by common descent, language, history, etc. ''(Collins English Dictionary)''<br /> <br /> So are Wikipedia editors entitled to describe Catalonia as a nation? On the basis of the foregoing, clearly they are. And what about the Spanish Constitutional Court? Well, neither they nor any other institution or legislature have any business to dictate English usage. Many editors (particularly some who are not native English speakers) have failed to take account of this fact. When the term “nation” is used in the context of Catalonia’s legal status, we need to make it quite clear in what sense it’s being used.<br /> <br /> Let me hasten to add that the foregoing mustn’t be taken to imply that I’m supporting a Catalanist position here: that would be to fall into exactly the sort of confusion between linguistic usage and legal definition that I'm criticizing.<br /> <br /> == Recent edit warring ==<br /> <br /> Look, this back and forth edit warring isn't really helping anything. You guys need to discuss it here. As an outsider with no stake in this, could I clarify a few points and ask people to follow them up below? There seem to be three main issues here -<br /> <br /> ===Nation/region/nationality etc in the lead, post court case===<br /> <br /> Per the above section, I don't think anyone can argue against the idea Catalonia is a &quot;nation&quot; in the broadest sense of the word - in the same way that is is also a &quot;region&quot;, and &quot;area&quot; or whatever, as well as more formally an &quot;Autonomous Community&quot;. The Spanish Constitutional Court ruling would also seem - according to the [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/spain/7861118/Catalonia-can-call-itself-a-nation-rules-Spains-top-court.html Telegraph piece] being cited - to have now more formally confirmed/accepted the use of the term &quot;nation&quot; in the latest Statute of Autonomy. However, it seems that they are saying that precisely because it is simply a vague cultural term that does not have a &quot;legal value&quot; or constitutional implications - ie it's accurate, but not that significant. The issue at stake is what to highlight and prioritise in the lead, and I'm not sure that simply sourcing to the Telegraph piece helps. That article also describes Catalonia as a &quot;region&quot;, and it's not clear on what basis one term is being preferred here over any other. It seems to me that using more formally defined terminology, where the terms wiki-link to pages about terms as they are used in a Spanish context - ie as in [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;oldid=371840349 this version] - would be better.<br /> <br /> :I don't think this formula would work, because the list of Spain's &quot;constituent historical nationalities&quot; has never been laid out and, in any event, it would open a can of worms. One million pounds for those who try (and succeed on) it: would Navarre be part of the Basque nation? Is there a constituent nationality called Castile? If that's so, would Andalusia be part of it (it was part of Castile's Crown, after all..)? Etc, etc.<br /> <br /> :Nor can we accept, as some editor has pretended, that all of Spain's autonomous regions are nationalities. Madrid is an autonomous region, but neither a nation nor a nationality. The same goes for, let's say, Extremadura, Cantabria or Murcia. I'm sorry for being so blunt on the matter, but some of Spain's autonomous regions are nations whereas others are just that: regions. And we all know who's who on this.<br /> <br /> :The points are: <br /> <br /> ::(a) Catalonia's Autonomy Charter describes it as a nation (whether this is legally binding is of no importance: this is Wikipedia, not a constitutionalists' forum). This term ('nation') was sanctioned by (a) Catalonia's Parliament, (b) Spain's Parliament and (c) Catalonia's people in a referendum.<br /> <br /> ::(b) Spain's Constitutional Court has sanctioned its use (again: whether this is legally binding is of no importance: this is Wikipedia, not a constitutionalists' forum). <br /> <br /> ::(c) Countless English-language sources (and this is ''English'' Wikipedia, by the way) describe Catalonia as a nation. Those sources (for instance, The Daily Telegraph) can't be accused of any sort of nationalist leaning. Quite the contrary, as the Irish experience shows to us.<br /> <br /> [[User:Andreas Balart|Andreas Balart]] ([[User talk:Andreas Balart|talk]]) 08:27, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Order of languages===<br /> <br /> Is there a formal, agreed view in the real world of which of Catalan and Spanish is the &quot;main&quot; language, eg by virtue of official recognition as such within Catalonia and/or Spain as a whole, or are there official figures that reveal one language is more commonly spoken as a first language in Catalonia than the other? If so, the order should just follow that. If not, or there's no clear answer on those criteria, how about going by alphabetical order, ie Catalan first (although it would be slightly odd to apply this across all languages and put Aranese right at the top)?<br /> <br /> ===Parliament===<br /> <br /> It seems kind of obvious to me that the Parliament field in the infobox should refer to the Catalan parliament and link to that page, not to the national Spanish parliament. See [[Scotland]] for example.<br /> <br /> Anyway, those are my thoughts, if they help. There's plenty else that needs improving with the rest of the article, and genuine vandalism seems to slip by unnoticed while all this gets edit warred over. --&lt;small&gt;'''[[User:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;navy&quot;&gt;N-HH&lt;/font&gt;]]''' '''[[User talk:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]/[[Special:Contributions/N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;edits&lt;/font&gt;]]'''&lt;/small&gt; 15:23, 5 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Dear '''N-HH''',<br /> <br /> :If anything this point demostrates the sort of people who've hijacked and taken over this article over the last months and years, masquerading their byass as ''consensus'': they were actually ''so'' byassed that they '''deleted any reference''' to Catalonia's Parliament on Catalonia's infobox. It beggars belief.<br /> <br /> :We can put it down to a whole set of prejudices. Otherwise, it is rather difficult to understand this behaviour.<br /> <br /> :For too many months, I've been watching over it. But enough is enough. <br /> <br /> :[[User:Andreas Balart|Andreas Balart]] ([[User talk:Andreas Balart|talk]]) 08:32, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Automate archiving? ==<br /> <br /> Does anyone object to me setting up automatic archiving for this page using MiszaBot? Unless otherwise agreed, I would set it to archive threads that have been inactive for 30 days and keep ten threads.--[[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] ([[User talk:Oneiros|talk]]) 20:43, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :{{done}}--[[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] ([[User talk:Oneiros|talk]]) 13:47, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Spain high court rules against &quot;nation&quot; term ==<br /> <br /> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100710/ap_on_re_eu/eu_spain_catalan_charter &lt;span style=&quot;font-size: smaller;&quot; class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/75.85.14.106|75.85.14.106]] ([[User talk:75.85.14.106|talk]]) 02:14, 11 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;!-- Template:UnsignedIP --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;<br /> <br /> :No credit shoud be paid to anonymous vandalist comments<br /> :[[User:Eva Grossjean|Eva Grossjean]] ([[User talk:Eva Grossjean|talk]]) 14:11, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> ::Wikipedia is about speaking from the facts, not only from part of the political POV or from the legal POV (legal but not moral as the decisions of Spanish Constitutional Court are more than discussed). Anyone at Catalonia knows a significant part of the people living there feels that part of Spain as a nation with right of self-governing and any source considered trustable should reflect that. Any editor not trusting this can search about the Catalan display on this 11th July and will see that spanish high court is simply applying a centralist POV. BR anonymous. [[Special:Contributions/95.61.18.160|95.61.18.160]] ([[User talk:95.61.18.160|talk]]) 19:00, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Catalonia is not a nation (at least legally) but a historical nationality. ==<br /> <br /> Spain's Constitutional Court accepts the definition as nation for Catalonia but has no legal value. For legal purposes is still considered a historical nationality and in any case should not be included within the framework of political status. Catalonia is only an autonomous region of Spain. &lt;small&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Arkarull|Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Arkarull|contribs]]) 13:54, 12 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/small&gt;&lt;!-- Template:Unsigned --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;<br /> <br /> <br /> :Spain's constitutional Court is not the only POV ,and obviously is an interested POV. It is internationally accepted that part of the Catalan population feels Catalonia as a nation. It is a case very similar to Quebec so no such debate makes sense. The spanish constituional court is just an interested part in the conflict.[[Special:Contributions/95.61.18.160|95.61.18.160]] ([[User talk:95.61.18.160|talk]]) 19:03, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::For an encyclopedia the only valid POV is the legal POV, and in Spain the Constituctional Court's decissions are definitives. If Wikipedia doesn't respect that, a lot of other articles must be corrected. Scotland, for example, is only a historical country of United Kingdom or is a nation? I am Spanish but I respect the Catalan nationalism, as it has perfect historical foundations, and I think they are a nation, of course, but include social views and personal in a section intended to the political situation, whatever it is, for better or for worse, is not encyclopedic. [[Special:Contributions/Arkarull]] ([[User talk:Arkarull|talk]]) 12:00, 13 July 2010 (UTC)</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Archbishop_of_York&diff=373093061 2010-07-12T15:15:30Z

<p>Arkarull: </p> <hr /> <div>[[File:York Easter Sunday 2007.jpg|thumb|right|200px|[[John Sentamu]] Archibishop of York (2005-present)]]<br /> <br /> The '''Archbishop of York''' is a high-ranking cleric in the [[Church of England]], second only to the [[Archbishop of Canterbury]]. He is the [[diocesan bishop]] of the [[Diocese of York]] and [[metropolitan bishop|metropolitan]] of the [[Province of York]], which covers the northern portion of England (north of the [[river Trent|Trent]]) as well as the [[Isle of Man]]. The archbishop is a member ''ex officio'' of the [[House of Lords]], and is styled ''[[Primate (religion)|Primate]] of England''. (The Archbishop of Canterbury is &quot;Primate of All England&quot;.)<br /> <br /> His throne is in [[York Minster]] in central [[York]] and his official residence is [[Bishopthorpe Palace]] in the village of [[Bishopthorpe]], outside York.<br /> <br /> The incumbent, since 5 October 2005, is the Most Reverend [[John Sentamu]]. It is customary for a Church of England Bishop or Archbishop to sign himself with his given name and the (usually abbreviated) Latin name of his See - in this case &quot;Ebor:&quot; which is an abbreviation of ''Eboracum'', the Latin name for [[York]]. The present archbishop has chosen to sign himself &quot;Sentamu Ebor&quot; instead of &quot;John Ebor&quot; because Sentamu is in fact not his surname but another given name (in Uganda surnames (family names) are uncommon, most people simply having several given names, often one from Christian tradition and one from Ugandan, which can be used interchangeably).<br /> <br /> ==History==<br /> [[File:Archbishop William Temple.jpg|thumb|right|200px|[[William Temple (archbishop)|William Temple]] Archibishop of York (1929-42)]]<br /> ===Roman===<br /> There was a bishop in York from very early Christian times. Bishops of York were particularly present at the Councils of [[Council of Arles|Arles]] and [[First Council of Nicaea|Nicaea]]. However, this early Christian community was later destroyed by the pagan [[Saxons]] and there is no direct succession from these bishops to the post-Augustinian ones.<br /> <br /> ===Saxon, Viking and Medieval===<br /> The diocese was refounded by [[Paulinus of York|Paulinus]] (a member of [[Augustine of Canterbury|Augustine's mission]]) in the 7th century. Notable among these early bishops is [[Wilfrid]]. These early bishops of York acted as diocesan rather than archdiocesan prelates until the time of [[Ecgbert, Archbishop of York|Ecgbert of York]], who received the [[pallium]] from [[Pope Gregory III]] in 735 and established metropolitan rights in the north. Until the Danish invasion the archbishops of Canterbury occasionally exercised authority, and it was not till the [[Norman Conquest]] that the archbishops of York asserted their complete independence.<br /> <br /> At the time of the Norman invasion York had jurisdiction over [[Anglican Diocese of Worcester|Worcester]], [[Diocese of Lichfield|Lichfield]], and [[Diocese of Lincoln|Lincoln]], as well as the dioceses in the Northern Isles and [[Scotland]]. But the first three sees just mentioned were taken from York in 1072. In 1154 the suffragan sees of the [[Diocese of Sodor and Man|Isle of Man]] and [[Orkney]] were transferred to the Norwegian [[archbishop of Nidaros]] (today's Trondheim), and in 1188 all the Scottish dioceses except [[Whithorn]] were released from subjection to York, so that only the dioceses of [[Diocese of Galloway|Whithorn]], [[Diocese of Durham|Durham]], and [[Diocese of Carlisle|Carlisle]] remained to the Archbishops as suffragan sees. Of these, Durham was practically independent, for the [[county palatine|palatine]] bishops of that see were little short of sovereigns in their own jurisdiction. Sodor and Man were returned to York during the fourteenth century, to compensate for the loss of Whithorn to the Scottish Church.<br /> <br /> Several of the archbishops of York held the ministerial office of [[Lord Chancellor]] of England and played some parts in affairs of state. As [[Peter Heylyn]] (1600&amp;ndash;1662) wrote: &quot;This see has yielded to the Church eight saints, to the Church of Rome three cardinals, to the realm of England twelve Lord Chancellors and two [[Lord Treasurer]]s, and to the north of England two [[Lord President of the North|Lord President]]s.&quot; The bishopric's role was also complicated by [[Primacy of Canterbury|continued conflict over primacy with the see of Canterbury]].<br /> <br /> ===Reformation===<br /> At the time of the [[English Reformation|Reformation]] York possessed three suffragan sees, Durham, Carlisle, and Sodor and Man, to which during the brief space of [[Mary I of England|Queen Mary I]]'s reign (1553–1558) may be added the Diocese of Chester, founded by [[Henry VIII of England|Henry VIII]], but subsequently recognized by the Pope.<br /> <br /> Until 1559, the bishops and archbishops were in Communion with the [[Pope]] in Rome. This is no longer the case as the Archbishop of York together with the rest of the [[Church of England]] is part of the [[Anglican Communion]].<br /> <br /> [[Walter de Grey]] purchased [[York Place]] in [[London]], which after the fall of [[Cardinal (Catholicism)|Cardinal]] [[Thomas Wolsey]], was to become the [[Palace of Whitehall]].<br /> The Archbishop of York is the [[Metropolitan bishop|metropolitan]] bishop of the [[Province of York]], and is the junior of the two archbishops of the [[Church of England]], after the [[Archbishop of Canterbury]].&lt;ref name=crockfords100th&gt;''[[Crockford's Clerical Directory]] 2008/2009 (100th edition)'', Church House Publishing (ISBN 978-0-7151-1030-0).&lt;/ref&gt;&lt;ref name=HOCBC&gt;{{cite book |author=Fryde, E. B. |coauthors=Greenway, D. E.; Porter, S.; Roy, I. |title=Handbook of British Chronology|edition=Third Edition, revised |publisher=Cambridge University Press |location=Cambridge |year=1996 |isbn=0-521-56350-X|pages=224, 281–283 }}&lt;/ref&gt;&lt;ref name=BHOAOY&gt;[http://british-history.ac.uk/report.asp?compid=8457 British History Online Archbishops of York 1066-1300] Retrieved on 21 November 2008.&lt;/ref&gt; Since 5 October 2005, the incumbent is the Most Reverend [[John Sentamu]].&lt;ref name=&quot;crockfords100th&quot; /&gt;<br /> <br /> The archbishop's throne is in [[York Minster]] in central York and his official residence is [[Bishopthorpe Palace]] in the village of Bishopthorpe, outside York.<br /> <br /> The Province of York includes the 12 Anglican Dioceses north of the Midlands as well as the Diocese of Southwell (Nottinghamshire) and the [[Diocese of Sodor and Man]] (the Isle of Man). The Archbishop is also a member ex officio of the [[House of Lords]].&lt;ref name=&quot;crockfords100th&quot;/&gt;<br /> <br /> Until the 16th century, the bishops and archbishops were in Communion with the [[Pope]] and the [[Roman Catholic Church]]. Since the [[English Reformation|Reformation]] the Archbishop of York is now in the [[Anglican Communion]].<br /> <br /> ==List of archbishops==<br /> ===Saxon to Norman===<br /> {|class=&quot;wikitable&quot; style=&quot;width:90%&quot;<br /> |-<br /> !style=&quot;background-color:#FABE60&quot; colspan=&quot;5&quot;|Bishops of York &lt;ref name=&quot;crockfords100th&quot; /&gt;&lt;ref name=&quot;HOCBC&quot; /&gt;&lt;ref name=&quot;BHOAOY&quot; /&gt;<br /> |- align=left<br /> ! style=&quot;background-color:#ffffec&quot; width=&quot;5%&quot; |No.<br /> ! style=&quot;background-color:#ffffec&quot; width=&quot;27%&quot; |Incumbent<br /> ! style=&quot;background-color:#ffffec&quot; width=&quot;9%&quot; |From<br /> ! style=&quot;background-color:#ffffec&quot; width=&quot;9%&quot; |Until<br /> ! style=&quot;background-color:#ffffec&quot; width=&quot;40%&quot; |Notes<br /> |-valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 1<br /> | [[Paulinus of York|Paulinus]]<br /> | align=center| 626<br /> | align=center| 633<br /> | font size=95%| Formerly a monk at St. Andrew's Monastery in Rome; later moved to [[Bishop of Rochester|Rochester]]; canonised.&lt;ref&gt;[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11585a.htm St. Paulinus, Archbishop of York]. Retrieved on 20 November 2008.&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| &amp;ndash; || ''Vacant'' ||align=center| ''633'' ||align=center| ''664'' ||<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 2<br /> | [[Chad of Mercia|Chad]]<br /> | align=center| 664<br /> | align=center| 669<br /> | Resigned the [[Episcopal see|see]] of York; later became [[Bishop of Lichfield|Bishop of Mercia and Lindsey]]; canonised.<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 3<br /> | [[Wilfrid]]<br /> | align=center| 664<br /> | align=center| 678<br /> | Ejected from York; later became [[Bishop of Chichester|Bishop of Selsey]]; canonised<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 4<br /> | [[Bosa of York|Bosa]]<br /> | align=center| 678<br /> | align=center| 706<br /> | Canonised<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 5<br /> | [[John of Beverley]]<br /> | align=center| 706<br /> | align=center| 714<br /> | [[Translation (ecclesiastical)|Translated]] from [[Bishop of Hexham|Hexham]]; resigned the see; canonised in 1037<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 6<br /> | [[Wilfrid II]]<br /> | align=center| 714<br /> | align=center| 732<br /> | Resigned the see; canonised<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 7<br /> | [[Ecgbert (Archbishop of York)|Ecgbert]]<br /> | align=center| c.732<br /> | align=center| 735<br /> | York elevated to Archbishopric in 735<br /> |}<br /> <br /> {|class=&quot;wikitable&quot; style=&quot;width:90%&quot;<br /> |-<br /> !style=&quot;background-color:#FABE60&quot; colspan=&quot;5&quot;|Archbishops of York &lt;ref name=&quot;crockfords100th&quot; /&gt;&lt;ref name=&quot;HOCBC&quot; /&gt;&lt;ref name=&quot;BHOAOY&quot; /&gt;<br /> |- align=left<br /> ! style=&quot;background-color:#ffffec&quot; width=&quot;5%&quot; |No.<br /> ! style=&quot;background-color:#ffffec&quot; width=&quot;27%&quot; |Incumbent<br /> ! style=&quot;background-color:#ffffec&quot; width=&quot;9%&quot; |From<br /> ! style=&quot;background-color:#ffffec&quot; width=&quot;9%&quot; |Until<br /> ! style=&quot;background-color:#ffffec&quot; width=&quot;40%&quot; |Notes<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center|<br /> | [[Ecgbert (Archbishop of York)|Ecgbert]]<br /> | align=center| 735<br /> | align=center| 766<br /> | York elevated to Archbishopric in 735<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 8<br /> | [[Æthelbert of York|Æthelbert]]<br /> | align=center| c.767<br /> | align=center| c.780<br /> | Also known as Æthelbeorht, Adalberht, Ælberht, Aelberht, Aldbert or Æthelbert<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 9<br /> | [[Eanbald I]]<br /> | align=center| c.780<br /> | align=center| 796<br /> |<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 10<br /> | [[Eanbald II]]<br /> | align=center| 796<br /> | align=center| c.808<br /> |<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 11<br /> | [[Wulfsige of York|Wulfsige]]<br /> | align=center| c.808<br /> | align=center| c.834<br /> |<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 12<br /> | [[Wigmund]]<br /> | align=center| 837<br /> | align=center| 854<br /> |<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 13<br /> | [[Wulfhere of York|Wulfhere]]<br /> | align=center| 854<br /> | align=center| c.896<br /> | Fled the Danes in 872, returned in 873<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 14<br /> | [[Æthelbald of York|Æthelbald]]<br /> | align=center| 900<br /> | align=center| c.916<br /> | Sometimes known as Æthelbeald, Athelbald, or Ethelbald<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 15<br /> | [[Hrotheweard]]<br /> | align=center| c.916<br /> | align=center| 931<br /> | Sometimes known as Lodeward<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 16<br /> | [[Wulfstan I]]<br /> | align=center| 931<br /> | align=center| 956<br /> |<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 17<br /> | [[Oskytel]]<br /> | align=center| c.958<br /> | align=center| 971<br /> | [[Translation (ecclesiastical)|Translated]] from [[Bishop of Dorchester|Dorchester]]. Also known as Oscytel<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 18<br /> | [[Edwald]]<br /> | colspan=&quot;2&quot; align=center| 971<br /> | Also known as Edwaldus or Ethelwold<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 19<br /> | [[Oswald of Worcester|Oswald]]<br /> | align=center| 971<br /> | align=center| 992<br /> | Held both the sees of York and [[Bishop of Worcester|Worcester]]. Canonised<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 20<br /> | [[Ealdwulf (died 1002)|Ealdwulf]]<br /> | align=center| 995<br /> | align=center| 1002<br /> | Held both the sees of York and [[Bishop of Worcester|Worcester]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 21<br /> | [[Wulfstan II]]<br /> | align=center| 1002<br /> | align=center| 1023<br /> | Held both the sees of York and [[Bishop of Worcester|Worcester]] until 1016. Also known as Lupus<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 22<br /> | [[Ælfric Puttoc]]<br /> | align=center| 1023<br /> | align=center| 1041<br /> | Held the sees of York and [[Bishop of Worcester|Worcester]] 1040-41. Ejected from both in 1041<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| &amp;ndash;<br /> | ''[[Æthelric (Archbishop of York)|Æthelric]]''<br /> | align=center| ''1041''<br /> | align=center| ''1042''<br /> | ''Elected Archbishop in 1041, but was quashed in 1042''<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| (22)<br /> | [[Ælfric Puttoc]]<br /> | align=center| 1042<br /> | align=center| 1051<br /> | Restored to York only<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 23<br /> | [[Cynesige]]<br /> | align=center| 1051<br /> | align=center| 1060<br /> | Also known as Kynsige<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 24<br /> | [[Ealdred (archbishop)|Ealdred]]<br /> | align=center| 1061<br /> | align=center| 1069<br /> | Held the see of [[Bishop of Worcester|Worcester]] 1046-61, of [[Bishop of Hereford|Hereford]] 1056-60, and of York 1061-69. Also known as Ealdred<br /> |}<br /> <br /> ===Norman to Reformation===<br /> {|class=&quot;wikitable&quot; style=&quot;width:90%&quot;<br /> |-<br /> !style=&quot;background-color:#FABE60&quot; colspan=&quot;5&quot;|Archbishops of York &lt;ref name=&quot;crockfords100th&quot; /&gt;&lt;ref name=&quot;HOCBC&quot; /&gt;&lt;ref name=&quot;BHOAOY&quot; /&gt;<br /> |- align=left<br /> ! style=&quot;background-color:#ffffec&quot; width=&quot;5%&quot; |No.<br /> ! style=&quot;background-color:#ffffec&quot; width=&quot;27%&quot; |Incumbent<br /> ! style=&quot;background-color:#ffffec&quot; width=&quot;9%&quot; |From<br /> ! style=&quot;background-color:#ffffec&quot; width=&quot;9%&quot; |Until<br /> ! style=&quot;background-color:#ffffec&quot; width=&quot;40%&quot; |Notes<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 25<br /> | [[Thomas of Bayeux|Thomas I]]<br /> | align=center| 1070<br /> | align=center| 1100<br /> | Also known as Thomas of Bayeux<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 26<br /> | [[Gerard (Archbishop of York)|Gerard]]<br /> | align=center| 1100<br /> | align=center| 1108<br /> | [[Translation (ecclesiastical)|Translated]] from [[Bishop of Hereford|Hereford]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 27<br /> | [[Thomas II of York|Thomas II]]<br /> | align=center| 1109<br /> | align=center| 1114<br /> |<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 28<br /> | [[Thurstan]]<br /> | align=center| 1119<br /> | align=center| 1140<br /> | He was elected in 1114, but wasn't [[consecrate]]d until 1119<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| &amp;ndash;<br /> | ''[[Waltheof of Melrose]]''<br /> | colspan=&quot;2&quot; align=center| ''1140''<br /> | ''Nominated Archbishop, but was quashed by [[Stephen of England|King Stephen]]; later became [[Abbot of Melrose]]''<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| &amp;ndash;<br /> | ''[[Henry de Sully, Abbot of Fécamp|Henry de Sully]]''<br /> | colspan=&quot;2&quot; align=center| ''1140''<br /> | ''[[Abbot]] of [[Fécamp Abbey]]. Nominated Archbishop, but was quashed by [[Pope Innocent II]]''<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 29<br /> | [[William of York|William FitzHerbert]]<br /> | align=center| 1143<br /> | align=center| 1147<br /> | Deposed by [[Pope Eugene III]]. Canonised in 1226<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| &amp;ndash;<br /> | ''[[Hilary of Chichester]]''<br /> | align=center| 1147<br /> | align=center| 1147<br /> | Deposed by [[Pope Eugene III]], elected [[Bishop of Chichester]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 30<br /> | [[Henry Murdac]]<br /> | align=center| 1147<br /> | align=center| 1153<br /> | Formerly [[Abbot]] of [[Fountains Abbey]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| (29)<br /> | [[William of York|William FitzHerbert]]<br /> | align=center| 1153<br /> | align=center| 1154<br /> | Restored by [[Pope Anastasius IV]]. Canonised in 1226<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 31<br /> | [[Roger de Pont L'Evêque]]<br /> | align=center| 1154<br /> | align=center| 1181<br /> | Formerly [[Archdeacon of Canterbury]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 32<br /> | [[Geoffrey, Archbishop of York|Geoffrey Plantagenet]]<br /> | align=center| 1191<br /> | align=center| 1212<br /> | Formerly [[Bishop of Lincoln|Bishop-elect of Lincoln]]. Elected Archbishop in 1189, but was only [[consecrate]]d in 1191<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| &amp;ndash;<br /> | ''[[Simon Langton (archbishop)|Simon Langton]]''<br /> | colspan=&quot;2&quot; align=center| ''1215''<br /> | ''Elected Archbishop of York in June 1215, but was quashed on 20 August 1215 by [[Pope Innocent III]]; later became [[Archdeacon of Canterbury]]''<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 33<br /> | [[Walter de Gray]]<br /> | align=center| 1216<br /> | align=center| 1255<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Worcester|Worcester]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 34<br /> | [[Sewal de Bovil]]<br /> | align=center| 1256<br /> | align=center| 1258<br /> | Formerly [[Dean of York]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 35<br /> | [[Godfrey Ludham]]<br /> | align=center| 1258<br /> | align=center| 1265<br /> | Formerly [[Dean of York]]. Also known as Godfrey Kineton<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| &amp;ndash;<br /> | ''[[William Langton]]''<br /> | colspan=&quot;2&quot; align=center| ''1265''<br /> | ''[[Dean of York]] (1262–1279). Elected Archbishop in March 1265, but was quashed in November 1265.''&lt;ref&gt;[http://british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=10458#s22 William de Langeton alias of Rotherfield]. Retrieved on 20 November 2008.&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| &amp;ndash;<br /> | ''[[Bonaventure]]''<br /> | align=center| ''1265''<br /> | align=center| ''1266''<br /> | ''Selected as Archbishop in November 1265, but never [[consecrated]] and resigned the appointment in October 1266''<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 36<br /> | [[Walter Giffard]]<br /> | align=center| 1266<br /> | align=center| 1279<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Bath and Wells|Bath and Wells]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 37<br /> | [[William de Wickwane]]<br /> | align=center| 1279<br /> | align=center| 1285<br /> |<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 38<br /> | [[John le Romeyn]]<br /> | align=center| 1286<br /> | align=center| 1296<br /> | Also known as John Romanus<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 39<br /> | [[Henry of Newark]]<br /> | align=center| 1298<br /> | align=center| 1299<br /> | Formerly [[Dean of York]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 40<br /> | [[Thomas of Corbridge]]<br /> | align=center| 1300<br /> | align=center| 1304<br /> |<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 41<br /> | [[William Greenfield]]<br /> | align=center| 1306<br /> | align=center| 1315<br /> |<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 42<br /> | [[William Melton]]<br /> | align=center| 1317<br /> | align=center| 1340<br /> |<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 43<br /> | [[William Zouche]]<br /> | align=center| 1342<br /> | align=center| 1352<br /> | Also known as William de la Zouche<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 44<br /> | Cardinal [[John of Thoresby|John Thoresby]]<br /> | align=center| 1353<br /> | align=center| 1373<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Worcester|Worcester]]. Created a [[Cardinal (Catholicism)|Cardinal]] in 1361.&lt;ref&gt;[http://www.fiu.edu/~mirandas/bios1361.htm#Thoresby John Cardinal Thoresby]. ''The Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church''. Retrieved on 20 November 2008.&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 45<br /> | [[Alexander Neville]]<br /> | align=center| 1374<br /> | align=center| 1388<br /> | Translated to [[Archbishop of St Andrews|St Andrew's]] in 1388<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 46<br /> | [[Thomas Arundel]]<br /> | align=center| 1388<br /> | align=center| 1396<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Ely|Ely]]; later moved to [[Archbishop of Canterbury|Canterbury]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 47<br /> | [[Robert Waldby]]<br /> | align=center| 1397<br /> | align=center| 1398<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Chichester|Chichester]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| &amp;ndash;<br /> | ''[[Walter Skirlaw]]''<br /> | align=center| 1398<br /> | align=center| 1398<br /> | [[Bishop of Durham]], elected but put aside by King [[Richard II of England]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 48<br /> | [[Richard le Scrope]]<br /> | align=center| 1398<br /> | align=center| 1405<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Lichfield|Lichfield]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| &amp;ndash;<br /> | ''[[Thomas Langley]]''<br /> | align=center| ''1405''<br /> | align=center| ''1406''<br /> | ''Elected Archbishop in August 1405, but was quashed in May 1406;''<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| &amp;ndash;<br /> | ''[[Robert Hallam]]''<br /> | align=center| ''1406''<br /> | align=center| ''1407''<br /> | ''Nominated Archbishop in May 1406 by [[Pope Innocent VII]], but was vetoed by [[Henry IV of England|King Henry IV]]''<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 49<br /> | [[Henry Bowet]]<br /> | align=center| 1407<br /> | align=center| 1423<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Bath and Wells|Bath and Wells]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| &amp;ndash;<br /> | ''[[Philip Morgan (archbishop)|Philip Morgan]]''<br /> | align=center| ''1423''<br /> | align=center| ''1424''<br /> | ''Elected Archbishop in 1423, but was quashed in 1424''<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| &amp;ndash;<br /> | ''[[Richard Fleming]]''<br /> | align=center| ''1424''<br /> | align=center| ''1425''<br /> | ''Conferred as Archbishop by [[Pope Martin V]], but was refused by [[Henry V of England|King Henry V]], and Fleming resigned the appointment in July 1425''<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 50<br /> | Cardinal [[John Kemp]]e<br /> | align=center| 1426<br /> | align=center| 1452<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of London|London]]; created a [[Cardinal (Catholicism)|Cardinal]] in 1439;&lt;ref&gt;[http://www.fiu.edu/~mirandas/bios1439.htm#Kempe John Cardinal Kempe]. ''The Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church''. Retrieved on 20 November 2008.&lt;/ref&gt; later moved to [[Archbishop of Canterbury|Canterbury]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 51<br /> | [[William Booth (archbishop)|William Booth]]<br /> | align=center| 1452<br /> | align=center| 1464<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Lichfield|Lichfield]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 52<br /> | [[George Neville (archbishop)|George Neville]]<br /> | align=center| 1465<br /> | align=center| 1476<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Exeter|Exeter]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 53<br /> | [[Lawrence Booth]]<br /> | align=center| 1476<br /> | align=center| 1480<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Durham|Durham]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 54<br /> | [[Thomas Rotherham]]<br /> | align=center| 1480<br /> | align=center| 1500<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Lincoln|Lincoln]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 55<br /> | [[Thomas Savage]]<br /> | align=center| 1501<br /> | align=center| 1507<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of London|London]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 56<br /> | Cardinal [[Christopher Bainbridge]]<br /> | align=center| 1508<br /> | align=center| 1514<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Durham|Durham]]; created a [[Cardinal (Catholicism)|Cardinal]] in 1511.&lt;ref&gt;[http://www.fiu.edu/~mirandas/bios1511.htm#Bainbridge Christopher Cardinal Bainbridge]. ''The Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church''. Retrieved on 20 November 2008.&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 57<br /> | Cardinal [[Thomas Wolsey]]<br /> | align=center| 1514<br /> | align=center| 1530<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Lincoln|Lincoln]] in 1514; created a Cardinal in 1515;&lt;ref&gt;[http://www.fiu.edu/~mirandas/bios1515.htm#Wolsey Thomas Cardinal Wolsey]. ''The Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church''. Retrieved on 20 November 2008.&lt;/ref&gt; held with [[Bishop of Bath and Wells|Bath and Wells]] 1518-23; [[Bishop of Durham|Durham]] 1523-29; and [[Bishop of Winchester|Winchester]] 1529-30.<br /> |}<br /> <br /> ===Reformation to present===<br /> {|class=&quot;wikitable&quot; style=&quot;width:90%&quot;<br /> |-<br /> !style=&quot;background-color:#FABE60&quot; colspan=&quot;5&quot;|Archbishops of York &lt;ref name=&quot;crockfords100th&quot; /&gt;&lt;ref name=&quot;HOCBC&quot; /&gt;&lt;ref name=&quot;BHOAOY&quot; /&gt;<br /> |- align=left<br /> ! style=&quot;background-color:#ffffec&quot; width=&quot;5%&quot; |No.<br /> ! style=&quot;background-color:#ffffec&quot; width=&quot;27%&quot; |Incumbent<br /> ! style=&quot;background-color:#ffffec&quot; width=&quot;9%&quot; |From<br /> ! style=&quot;background-color:#ffffec&quot; width=&quot;9%&quot; |Until<br /> ! style=&quot;background-color:#ffffec&quot; width=&quot;40%&quot; |Notes<br /> |-valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 58<br /> | [[Edward Lee (archbishop)|Edward Lee]]<br /> | align=center| 1531<br /> | align=center| 1544<br /> | [[Translation (ecclesiastical)|Translated]] from [[Bishop of St David's|St David's]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 59<br /> | [[Robert Holgate]]<br /> | align=center| 1545<br /> | align=center| 1554<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Llandaff|Llandaff]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 60<br /> | [[Nicholas Heath]]<br /> | align=center| 1555<br /> | align=center| 1559<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Worcester|Worcester]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 61<br /> | [[Thomas Young (archbishop)|Thomas Young]]<br /> | align=center| 1561<br /> | align=center| 1568<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of St David's|St David's]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 62<br /> | [[Edmund Grindal]]<br /> | align=center| 1570<br /> | align=center| 1576<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of London|London]]; later moved to [[Archbishop of Canterbury|Canterbury]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 63<br /> | [[Edwin Sandys (archbishop)|Edwin Sandys]]<br /> | align=center| 1577<br /> | align=center| 1588<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of London|London]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 64<br /> | [[John Piers]]<br /> | align=center| 1589<br /> | align=center| 1594<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Salisbury|Salisbury]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 65<br /> | [[Matthew Hutton (Archbishop of York)|Matthew Hutton]]<br /> | align=center| 1595<br /> | align=center| 1606<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Durham|Durham]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 66<br /> | [[Tobias Matthew]]<br /> | align=center| 1606<br /> | align=center| 1628<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Durham|Durham]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 67<br /> | [[George Montaigne]]<br /> | colspan=&quot;2&quot; align=center| 1628<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Durham|Durham]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 68<br /> | [[Samuel Harsnett]]<br /> | align=center| 1629<br /> | align=center| 1631<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Norwich|Norwich]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 69<br /> | [[Richard Neile]]<br /> | align=center| 1632<br /> | align=center| 1640<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Winchester|Winchester]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 70<br /> | [[John Williams (Archbishop of York)|John Williams]]<br /> | align=center| 1641<br /> | align=center| 1650<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Lincoln|Lincoln]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| &amp;ndash; || ''Vacant'' ||align=center| ''1650'' ||align=center| ''1660'' ||<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 71<br /> | [[Accepted Frewen]]<br /> | align=center| 1660<br /> | align=center| 1664<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Lichfield|Lichfield]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 72<br /> | [[Richard Sterne (archbishop)|Richard Sterne]]<br /> | align=center| 1664<br /> | align=center| 1683<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Carlisle|Carlisle]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 73<br /> | [[John Dolben]]<br /> | align=center| 1683<br /> | align=center| 1686<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Rochester|Rochester]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 74<br /> | [[Thomas Lamplugh]]<br /> | align=center| 1688<br /> | align=center| 1691<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Exeter|Exeter]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 75<br /> | [[John Sharp (archbishop)|John Sharp]]<br /> | align=center| 1691<br /> | align=center| 1714<br /> | Formerly [[Dean of Canterbury]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 76<br /> | Sir [[William Dawes (archbishop)|William Dawes]]<br /> | align=center| 1714<br /> | align=center| 1724<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Chester|Chester]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 77<br /> | [[Lancelot Blackburne]]<br /> | align=center| 1724<br /> | align=center| 1743<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Exeter|Exeter]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 78<br /> | [[Thomas Herring]]<br /> | align=center| 1743<br /> | align=center| 1747<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Bangor|Bangor]]; later moved to [[Archbishop of Canterbury|Canterbury]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 79<br /> | [[Matthew Hutton (Archbishop of Canterbury)|Matthew Hutton]]<br /> | align=center| 1747<br /> | align=center| 1757<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Bangor|Bangor]]; later moved to [[Archbishop of Canterbury|Canterbury]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 80<br /> | [[John Gilbert (archbishop)|John Gilbert]]<br /> | align=center| 1757<br /> | align=center| 1761<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Salisbury|Salisbury]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 81<br /> | [[Robert Hay Drummond]]<br /> | align=center| 1761<br /> | align=center| 1776<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Salisbury|Salisbury]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 82<br /> | [[William Markham (archbishop)|William Markham]]<br /> | align=center| 1776<br /> | align=center| 1807<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Chester|Chester]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 83<br /> | [[Edward Venables-Vernon-Harcourt]]<br /> | align=center| 1808<br /> | align=center| 1847<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Carlisle|Carlisle]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 84<br /> | [[Thomas Musgrave]]<br /> | align=center| 1847<br /> | align=center| 1860<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Hereford|Hereford]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 85<br /> | [[Charles Thomas Longley]]<br /> | align=center| 1860<br /> | align=center| 1862<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Durham|Durham]]; later moved to [[Archbishop of Canterbury|Canterbury]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 86<br /> | [[William Thomson (Archbishop of York)|William Thomson]]<br /> | align=center| 1862<br /> | align=center| 1890<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Gloucester|Gloucester]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 87<br /> | [[William Connor Magee]]<br /> | colspan=&quot;2&quot; align=center| 1891<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Peterborough|Peterborough]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 88<br /> | [[William Dalrymple Maclagan]]<br /> | align=center| 1891<br /> | align=center| 1908<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Lichfield|Lichfield]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 89<br /> | [[Cosmo Lang|Cosmo Gordon Lang]]<br /> | align=center| 1909<br /> | align=center| 1928<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Stepney|Stepney]]; later moved to [[Archbishop of Canterbury|Canterbury]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 90<br /> | [[William Temple (archbishop)|William Temple]]<br /> | align=center| 1929<br /> | align=center| 1942<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Manchester|Manchester]]; later moved to [[Archbishop of Canterbury|Canterbury]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 91<br /> | [[Cyril Garbett|Cyril Forster Garbett]]<br /> | align=center| 1942<br /> | align=center| 1955<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Winchester|Winchester]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 92<br /> | [[Michael Ramsey|Arthur Michael Ramsey]]<br /> | align=center| 1956<br /> | align=center| 1961<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Durham|Durham]]; later moved to [[Archbishop of Canterbury|Canterbury]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 93<br /> | [[Donald Coggan|Frederick Donald Coggan]]<br /> | align=center| 1961<br /> | align=center| 1974<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Bradford|Bradford]]; later moved to [[Archbishop of Canterbury|Canterbury]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 94<br /> | [[Stuart Blanch, Baron Blanch|Stuart Yarworth Blanch]]<br /> | align=center| 1975<br /> | align=center| 1983<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Liverpool|Liverpool]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 95<br /> | [[John Habgood, Baron Habgood|John Stapylton Habgood]]<br /> | align=center| 1983<br /> | align=center| 1995<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Durham|Durham]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 96<br /> | [[David Hope, Baron Hope of Thornes|David Hope]]<br /> | align=center| 1995<br /> | align=center| 2005<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of London|London]]<br /> |- valign=top bgcolor=&quot;#ffffec&quot;<br /> | align=center| 97<br /> | [[John Sentamu]] &lt;ref&gt;[http://www.archbishopofyork.org/761 The Archbishop of York]. ''The official website of Dr John Sentamu, Archbishop of York. Retrieved on 21 November 2008.&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> | align=center| 2005<br /> | align=center| present<br /> | Translated from [[Bishop of Birmingham|Birmingham]]<br /> |}<br /> <br /> ==See also==<br /> {{Portal|Anglicanism}}<br /> *[[Archbishop of Canterbury]]<br /> *[[Accord of Winchester]]<br /> <br /> ==References==<br /> {{Reflist}}<br /> <br /> ==External links==<br /> *[http://www.archbishopofyork.org/761 Official Website]<br /> *[http://www.theyorker.co.uk/news/features/372 &quot;Archbishop talks Britishness and forgiveness&quot;]<br /> <br /> {{Anglican Bishops &amp; Archbishops - Great Britain}}<br /> <br /> [[Category:Archbishops of York| ]]<br /> [[Category:Lists of Anglican bishops and archbishops|York]]<br /> [[Category:Lists of English people|Archbishops of York]]<br /> [[Category:Diocese of York|York, Archbishop of]]<br /> [[Category:Episcopacy in Anglicanism|York, Archbishop of]]<br /> [[Category:Metropolitan bishops|York]]<br /> [[Category:Primates of the Church of England|York]]<br /> [[Category:People associated with the Royal National College for the Blind]]<br /> <br /> [[de:Erzbischof von York]]<br /> [[fr:Archevêque d'York]]<br /> [[nl:Aartsbisschop van York]]<br /> [[no:Erkebiskop av York]]<br /> [[fi:Yorkin arkkipiispa]]<br /> [[es:Arzobispo de York]]</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Catalonia&diff=373081390 2010-07-12T13:54:13Z

<p>Arkarull: /* Catalonia is not a nation (at least legally) but a historical nationality. */ new section</p> <hr /> <div>{{Skip to talk}}<br /> {{Talk header|search=yes}}<br /> {{Off topic warning}}<br /> {{Controversial3}}<br /> {{WikiProject Spain|class=c|importance=top}}<br /> {{WikiProject Catalan-speaker|class=c|importance=top}}<br /> {{OnThisDay|date1=2004-09-11|oldid1=9955831}}<br /> {{auto archiving notice|bot=MiszaBot|age=30|dounreplied=yes}}<br /> {{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn<br /> |target=Talk:Catalonia/Archive index<br /> |mask=Talk:Catalonia/Archive &lt;#&gt;<br /> |leading_zeros=0<br /> |indexhere=yes}}<br /> {{User:MiszaBot/config<br /> |archiveheader = {{aan|type=content}}<br /> |maxarchivesize = 200K<br /> |counter = 5<br /> |minthreadsleft = 10<br /> |minthreadstoarchive = 1<br /> |algo = old(30d)<br /> |archive = Talk:Catalonia/Archive %(counter)d<br /> }}<br /> <br /> == Catalonia definition must me corrected ==<br /> <br /> We must differentiate between geographic and politics definition.<br /> Catalonia is a geographical area comprising actual Catalan Community in Spain and Cerdanya which actually is the french department of Pyrinèes Oriental. If there is any reference to Catalonia as a nation, it must cover all Catalonia and not merely the Catalan Community of Spain.<br /> Both populations consider theirselves Catalans sharing the same Catalan language, (even it is not considered an official language in France because political assumptions) whith respect for each political nationality, french or spanish. <br /> <br /> The definition must be considered as follows:<br /> <br /> ''Catalonia Community covers an area of 32,114 km² and has an official population of 7,210,508[1]. It borders Cerdanya in France and Andorra to the north, Aragon to the west, the Valencian Community to the south, and the Mediterranean Sea to the east (580 km coastline). Official languages are Catalan, Spanish and Aranese.''<br /> <br /> I understand that the separatist ideas of some french and spanish nationalism against the European Union cultural heritage must be erradicated if we want the wikipedia project to progress.<br /> <br /> :I'm sorry but I must disagree with you. There is another concept for the whole catalan-speaking territories and it is [[Catalan Countries]].<br /> :Catalonia's definition is being discussed in the section above (for a long time).--[[User:Civit cardona|Civit cardona]] ([[User talk:Civit cardona|talk]]) 14:04, 15 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> I struggle to believe that Perpignan in France should only be counted as &quot;Catalan speaking&quot;. They fly the Catalan flag, it's historically and cultural strongly Catalan, and the Rugby League team (which should also be mentioned and linked in the article) is called Catalan Dragons. In Catalan the area is called Northern Catalonia. <br /> <br /> I'm sure this is a controversial issue whatever is included in the article, but ignoring Northern Catalonia in the article completely strikes me as a whitewash and not a neutral POV. [[User:Davini994|Davini994]] ([[User talk:Davini994|talk]]) 10:22, 3 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Bad english ==<br /> <br /> English in this article is suffering seriously. I quote an example: ''&quot;Actually the government of la Generalitat de Catalunya are developing a new type of administation that will agroup comarques and will substitute the provinces. Actually are called àmbit funcional territorial but with a new law will be called vegueries, there are seven àmbits (Àmbit metropolità de Barcelona, Camp de Tarragona, Alt Pirineu i Aran, Comarques Centrals, Comarques gironines and Ponent). That seven àmbits are define by the regional plan of Catalonia (in Catalan, Pla territorial general de Catalunya).[2][3]&quot;''<br /> &quot;Actually&quot; in english does not mean &quot;at the moment&quot; as &quot;actualmente&quot; does in spanish. The correct word would be &quot;currently&quot;. Also the verb &quot;agroup&quot; does not exist in english as far as i can tell. Also syntax is suffering. Please take the time to revise the text or I can do it when I find some time. <br /> [[User:Schizophonix|Schizophonix]] ([[User talk:Schizophonix|talk]]) 13:28, 5 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> :I think that I have improved it but maybe can be any mistake.--[[User:Vilarrubla|Vilar]] 13:35, 6 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> ::If you guys can't speak English, you shouldn't be editing the English Wikipedia. --[[User:Taraborn|Taraborn]] ([[User talk:Taraborn|talk]]) 17:37, 25 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Flag of Catalonia ==<br /> <br /> I think that there are some problems with that sentence: &quot;The flag of Catalonia or ''[[Senyera]]'' (''flag'' in [[Catalan language|Catalan]]), is a [[vexillological symbol]] based on the [[coat of arms]] of the [[Crown of Aragon]], which consists of four red stripes on a golden background. It is an official symbol since the Statute of Catalonia of 1932.&quot; The flag was an heraldic emblem of Counts of Barcelona before being in the Crown of Aragon.--[[User:Vilarrubla|Vilar]] 22:48, 19 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Since both claims are correct, next time, instead than removing a correct fact from an article (i.e: &quot;based on the [[coat of arms]] of the [[Crown of Aragon]]&quot;), you should, if willing to add your POV, limit yourself to add to that sentence a &quot;and of the counts of barcelona&quot; instead than erasing the content (which is also fully referenced). --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 01:18, 20 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> ::I have not erased anything and that was not fully referenced. The reference #46 says: &quot;The flag of Catalonia, which is the traditional flag with four red stripes on a yellow background, shall be present on public buildings and during official acts held in Catalonia.&quot; and I don't see anything about Crown of Aragon or Counts of Barcelona in that reference. --[[User:Vilarrubla|Vilar]] 10:45, 20 June 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == The map ==<br /> <br /> Carles, noticing your last [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=302485241&amp;oldid=302474758 edit], I just want to point you that each and every other article about CCAA has the vectorial map (just take a look yourself). If we want to keep some equality and sense around wikipedia, the correct thing is to leave the other one. there is no real reasons for this article to be the exemption. My thoughts only. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 22:40, 16 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Sorry, Maurice, I beg to disagree. At least the maps for the Valencian Community and the Balearic Islands have also been changed today (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Valencian_Community&amp;diff=302475380&amp;oldid=302426446] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Balearic_Islands&amp;diff=302472767&amp;oldid=302008420]) to this kind of Spain-centered map. So the situation is not like you seem to describe: the map in Catalonia article being a unique strange singularity to be corrected with respect to a long well-established tradition in all the remaining communities. No. The fact is that just now some people propose this new solution. We can discuss it, of course. My initial point is that I prefer the maps those communities have had for a long time because they are more globally-minded and show their position not only inside Spain, but also in a European context. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 23:09, 16 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::Sadly, like so many other times, it is not a point of what we do prefer, but to continue the path followed by the majority of the other articles. Let's not forget that this article is part of an encyclopedia, and as such, all related articles must follow the same guidelines. If you take a look at all the articles about CCAA. Like it or not, the vectorial map seems to be the prefered by all the editors involved in the majority of all those articles. If you take a look at the portuguese districts([[Braga (district)]], [[Bragança (district)]], [[Faro (district)]], [[Lisboa (district)]]...), the french regions ([[Alsace]], [[Champagne-Ardenne]], [Bourgogne]], [[Nord-Pas-de-Calais]], [[Pays de la Loire]], [[Rhône-Alpes]]...) or the italian italian regions ([[Abruzzo]], [[Calabria]], [[Lazio]], [[Marche]], [[Sardinia]], [[Tuscany]]...), you will notice that they all do share the same maps and that are always &quot;country-centered&quot; (if I may say so). Having different types of maps depending on the region selected is in my opinion undesirable.<br /> <br /> ::That said, I believe that the correct thing is to implement the map used by the majority of the articles CCAA-related. In addition, let's not forget that this is this the english wikipedia, and as such, it is like the &quot;international version&quot; of it. If some user from Indonesia wants to learn about a CCAA (let's say Catalonia in this particular case) you can bet for sure he might be much more interested to understand where it is placed in relation to the rest of the country than in relation to Europe.<br /> <br /> ::I think that those are the 2 most important reasons to keep the vectorial map. If someday, Europe really becomes something close enough to a united country, then your position of an europen-minded map should be the one to follow... But only if that is the position for all the articles in wikipedia related to europen regions... Cheers. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 17:45, 17 July 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::Thanks for your explanation, Maurice, and sorry for my late reply (I am back from holidays just now). I agree with you that homogeneity is good in general, but I'm still not sure whether it constitutes a sufficient reason for the change you propose. I haven't seen any wiki policy enforcing this uniformity, although I agree with you that it is desirable. But, actually, there would be a way to make both of us happy, i.e. to preserve both good properties at once (global-minded maps and homogeneity): uploading maps like those we had during the last years for the Catalan-speaking communities also for the remaining Spanish autonomous communities, right? This is my proposal. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 08:51, 19 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ::::I thought you were on vacations... Hope you enjoyed them! I don't mind your proposal but, do you know how to create maps? Because I don't. If nobody uploads those maps for the rest of the CCAA, we get back to start. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 09:49, 19 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::Yes, I've enjoyed them a lot, thanks! :) Good to see that you are open to a proposal that would solve both of our concern at once. As regards to the maps, this seems to completely feasible. I am checking that those files already exist: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Andaluc%C3%ADa.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Extremadura.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Castilla-La_Mancha.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Castilla_y_Le%C3%B3n.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_la_Comunidad_de_Madrid.png], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Galicia.png], etc. (you see the pattern). So homogeneity is not really a problem. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 10:34, 20 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Hi there Carles. Long time no see. <br /> <br /> I wanted to make you reconsider your position about keeping the european centered maps. For almost one year(?), you have been defending those maps against (quite a lot now) changes by multiple editors to the one used in the rest of CCAA related articles. We already discussed this matter long time ago (uniformity in wikipedia articles, the country being more important than the continent...).<br /> <br /> You know I don't agree with your position, but for the sake of both of us I left your option. But now, you should admit that your opinion is probably a minority.<br /> <br /> Tell me what you think. Cheers. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;MauritiusXXVII (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 10:05, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi Maurice! Nice to meet you here again. Hope you're doing fine.<br /> :I don't completely agree with your analysis of the situation. First, those maps are not my invention. They were already in stable versions of the entries when I joined the project, more than two years ago. Second, after a quick check on the history of the entry on [[Catalonia]], I've counted only four users changing the map to the Spanish-centered one since we discussed the issue. And none of them, unlike you, has bothered to write a single line on the talk page to state their points for the change. On the other hand, there has been one user who has proposed a [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mapa_de_localitzaci%C3%B3_a_les_comarques_catalanes.svg Catalan-centered map] which, coherently with my globally-minded approach, I don't like and I don't support. Therefore, I don't think that &quot;lonely Carles fighting against a majority of users who argue for a Spain-centered map&quot; is a faithful account of the situation, because they are few, they hardly argue, and there have even been proposals in a different direction. In this discussion, we made our positions quite clear. Let me remind my points:<br /> :* The main thing here is to offer an accurate map (faithful to both geographical and political reality) and as informative as possible to help readers from all over the world to locate these regions.<br /> :* In particular, the maps should clearly show the administrative borders of the autonomous communities, their position inside Spain (for they belong to this sovereign state, and nowadays sovereign states are the key element in geopolitical divisions), and their position in a wider context to give the maximum information to non-European readers. All of this can be achieved with the pictures I've been defending.<br /> :* Homogeneity with entries about other regions is certainly a good value to pursue and, as I already showed, it does not contradict any point above, because we already have in Commons maps of this kind (showing both Spanish and European context) for all the remaining Spanish regions.<br /> :--[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera#top|talk]]) 11:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Carles, all the autonomies of Spain have the same map. I understand that you are independentist but this it is not motive for including a map where you cannot see the whole country. I am sorry, but it isn't logical to include a map different to the rest. [[User:Diplomatiko|Diplomatiko]] ([[User talk:Diplomatiko|talk]]) 14:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi, Diplomatiko. Many thanks for joining the discussion. I would like to kindly ask you a couple of things. First, it would help the discussion a lot, if you would read carefully what has been said so far. In particular, you'll find a specific proposal dealing with the uniformity problem you are concerned with. Second, I would appreciate it very much if you would abstain from making assumptions on other users personal views. It doesn't really help the discussion (after all, personal opinions of the editors do not matter much when we are trying to produce a neutral text), and sometimes (this is the case now) you can be misled to wrong conclusions: I am not an independentist (not even a nationalist), as it can be easily seen in the userboxes in my webpage. Anyway, we can forget about this, because talk pages are not meant to discuss about any user, but about the article in question and to decide how to collectively improve it. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 14:50, 20 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :I see you are taking your time to think about it. Fair enough. In the meantime, I shall restore the previous consensual map. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 10:19, 25 February 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> I'm restoring the regular map (the one which all the other articles use). There's no reason to use another map: NUTS maps don't offer an enough clear sight of a country subdivision location. Furthermore, this (and sometimes the Valencian Community one, for obvious reasons...) is the only country subdivision article in the entire Wikipedia where they're used. [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 21:01, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi Icallbs. Thanks for your comments. But, have you bothered to read the discussion above where I showed that your concerns on homogeneity in Spanish regions entries are compatible with my concerns for globality for non-Spanish readers? Please take a look at it. On the other hand, let me remind that prior to changing a disputed content, you should reach consensus, not the other way around as you have done know (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus#Consensus-building]). Cheers, --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:51, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Maybe you misunderstood &quot;NUTS&quot;. [[NUTS of Spain|These]] are the Spanish NUTS regions, in which the map you use is based. <br /> <br /> :: I've read that discussion, and I must say those maps aren't suitable at all in this kind of articles. They just aren't, just have a look at France's subdivisions articles, or Italy's, or Portugal's, or Poland's. Sadly, I think those &quot;concerns&quot; aren't really &quot;for globality&quot;. Exaxtly because non-Spanish users are the ones who will be reading this, they'll the ones the maps should be adressed to. I encourage you to read the consesus-building article you pointed before for the further seeking of a common point. Other users like MauritiusXIII can help us improving these aspects too. In the meantime, probably the regular map is the better option because of the homogeneity. Also, I'd like you to consider Dr01drpny's option, it's the same map as the rest of Spain's regions and it has the globality element.<br /> <br /> :: [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 18:45, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi. I combined both maps to try to fulfill both concerns regarding homogeneity and wider region location inside Europe. You can add it to the article if you agree with it: [[:File:Localització de Catalunya.png]]. Cheers. --[[User:Dr01drpny|Dr01drpny]] ([[User talk:Dr01drpny|talk]]) 23:45, 2 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi there. Thank you very much, Dr01drpny, for your input. That moves towards the good direction to resolve the dispute, indeed. As for Icallbs, first let me say I'm sorry for having misunderstood the &quot;NUTS&quot; thing; I didn't know that concept. Thank you for pointing it out. However, you might want to apologize as well for assuming bad faith in me when you write &quot;I think those concerns aren't really for globality&quot;. I am proud to claim that all my contributions to Wikipedia (both in articles and in talk pages) are openly honest and faithful to my points of view; it would certainly be stupid to act otherwise when I am editing under my real name. So, this frank globality concern is starting to be addressed by Dr01drpny in his proposal, and I have tentatively tried how it looks in the article. I would like to ask him, since he looks very deft in map creation, to propose some other solutions which could make the European map bigger (now it is too hard to see). An easy solution is to increase the box on the right-bottom corner (there is some space on the sea and Africa that could be covered without problems). A better one would be to create something analogous to the maps used in [[Scotland]], [[Wales]] or [[England]], where the European map is the main one while the whole state (the UK in this case) is also shown in the box, which seems to be something of the highest importance to some users. After seeing (some of) these possibilities we could decide which is the nicest and most suitable for these articles. Needless to say, to satisfy the urge for homogeneity in Spanish autonomous communities articles, the new kind of map will have to be produced for each of them. Looking forward to hearing from all of you, --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:31, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Hi there. I agree with the idea of having a wider (Europe / World) localization map, especially for people from other countries. Still, there are some users who want homogeneity with the maps of all the other regions of Spain. Creating a new version of all these maps is a notable effort, and it would require a deeper consensus (currently the map is being changed almost every day). Maybe something to talk about in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Spain | WikiProject Spain]]. In the meanwhile I uploaded an updated version of the file with a bigger Europe map as Cnoguera asked. You can see the preview [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 | here]. --[[User:Dr01drpny|Dr01drpny]] ([[User talk:Dr01drpny|talk]]) 23:34, 6 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Hi, thanks again for you valuable help. That one is better indeed, but I still think that something like the UK maps would be even better (both having a clear depiction of the whole state administrative structure, as required by Maurice and Icallbs, and nice big global maps for a globally-minded English encyclopedia as seen e.g. in the UK entries). I suggest to explore that possibility before taking any decision. I understand the non-trivial effort the whole thing requires (and I truly thank you for your excellent technical help), but there certainly are strong concerns about homogeneity by several users, as you can see in the discussion above. As far as I am concerned, as a member of the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Catalan-speaking_Countries]], at least I'll work to have a uniform solution for the three articles under its scope. Sadly enough, while we are fruitfully discussing the issue here, some users like [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/79.153.124.250 this anonymous IP] keep trying to impose their point of view without bothering to contribute to the consensus building. I've already warned him about it. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 21:38, 7 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :However, if it is too difficult to produce these alternative maps, I suggest to go for the easiest solution and stick to the good old NUTS maps. Moreover there seems to be [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Basque_Country_%28autonomous_community%29#Edit_war_around_locator_map agreement on that elsewhere].--[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 15:27, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: That example doesn't suits our particular case... The country-centered map in that example just sucks! Portugal and France don't even appear. --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 19:04, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Oh, yes. You're right, now I see it. I assumed, reasonably, that this discussion in [[Talk:Basque Country (autonomous community)]] was analogous to ours because there actually was an identical edit war proposing the same kind of map. But now I see that the discussion is strangely ignoring that one and proposing an ugly Spain-centered map where the country looks like an island... --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 19:46, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: Like an island? Have you seen the German, French, Italian, Portuguese, or basically any other country subdivision article other than the British ones to use world maps for locating a region? It's stupid! Furthermore, the current map shows Portugal, the French border and even North Africa, which is much more than many (probably more than any other but the UK's constituent COUNTRIES [see what I did there?] articles). In the discussion you pointed at, there were only two votes... That's not a &quot;long-standing consensus&quot; nor it shows a reasonable solution. I'm sorry if I've been a bit rough in this comment, but these attempts to vandalize Wikipedia (specially the English one, cause it's the one millions of people from all countries, even non-English, read), trying to mislead them make me really upset. [[User:Icallbs|Icallbs]] ([[User talk:Icallbs|talk]]) 20:34, 9 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Yes, Icallbs, now you look upset indeed. Now you start referring to the proposals you don't like as &quot;stupid&quot; and to their defense as &quot;attempts to vandalize Wikipedia&quot; and &quot;trying to mislead&quot;... You know? it's a bad sign when one needs to use derogative terms to undermine the opponent's position in the discussion. But if you count to ten, take a deep breath, sit back and then read carefully the stuff above again, you'll realize what's written isn't that stupid after all. First, you'll see that the Spain-centered map where the country looks like an island I was referring to is, in fact, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Localizaci%C3%B3n_Comunidad_Vasca.png this one], and the island metaphor was already used in [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Basque_Country_(autonomous_community)#Edit_war_around_locator_map that discussion]. Second, you'll see I only attracted your attention to the Basque Country thing becauses it does resemble the discussion we currently having here, so it might be relevant. Third, you'll see I never described as a &quot;long-standing consensus&quot; what they have there, but I only said that &quot;there SEEMS to be an agreement&quot; there (and it really looks like that, when nobody has expressed any opinion against the NUTS map in that discussion thread; interestingly not even yourself after [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Basque_Country_(autonomous_community)&amp;diff=348810628&amp;oldid=348794880 you added the map you want]).<br /> :The discussion here is certainly far from being over. We are still waiting for new options from Dr01drpny or any other user able to produce them. So I wasn't restoring the NUTS maps (and BTW those are the really long-standing ones as a matter of fact in the Valencian Community, Balearic Islands and Catalonia entries) because of an alleged achievement of a new consensus. I was doing it because otherwise, when the map you like is there, some people seem to completely forget about the discussion and disappear for days. Interestingly enough, they suddenly come back when I restore the previous solution (sometimes yourself, sometimes some mysterious IPs which give little to none explanation for their edits). And, symmetrically, I could as well object that your putting back there the state-centered map is not fair before a decision is reached. But I won't, because my intention is already fulfilled by having people interested again in the discussion, which is the main issue here. Let us proceed then. --[[User:Cnoguera|Carles Noguera]] ([[User talk:Cnoguera|talk]]) 09:51, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> * Please, don't mess this discussion here with the rest of the Autonomous Communities'. IF and only IF there is a general Wikipedia guideline regarding this issue, you can discuss other articles. Otherwise, keep it as a per article discussion and don't change other articles in which you are NOT involved, as the BAC one. We had our own discussion there and reached our own consensus. BTW, I don't get the &quot;goodness&quot; of that island-like map. It's geographical projection is not adequate for representing Spain, nor it does represent accurate detailed maps for each AC, as the green ones do. And again, these maps were replaced recently by anonymous users, probably to match them with the maps used in the Spanish Wiki, that may be are not the most accurate ones, you know. [[User:Deibid|David]] ([[User talk:Deibid|talk]]) 14:49, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :: It is that &quot;IF&quot; precisely which I've been looking for weeks! Can't find anything... but I'm sure there is a guideline for these cases. If we find a guideline, we got the solution... I've tried quite a few wikiprojects but nothing... Any ideas, anyone? --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 19:47, 10 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :::As an outside observer who has occasionally reverted the wilder changes here ... I get confused exactly which map is which now, but FWIW I think the map should be clear in showing both where Catalonia is within Spain, and also where it is in the context of the wider European area. I'm not sure [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;oldid=352701357 this] version - the current one as I write - does that. It's too close-up, in the main part. I personally prefer the one [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 here], which I think was put together more recently. If you look for example at ones in respect of the UK, eg for [[Wales]] or [[Scotland]], they're even more &quot;global&quot; in perspective. In addition, there should ultimately be consistency across all the Spanish region/nation articles. &lt;small&gt;'''[[User:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;navy&quot;&gt;N-HH&lt;/font&gt;]]''' '''[[User talk:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]/[[Special:Contributions/N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;edits&lt;/font&gt;]]'''&lt;/small&gt; 14:56, 29 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;diff=347579475&amp;oldid=347579227 this version] is clearly the most desirable one. It has what all of us find important on a map. But we do lack of all the other maps for the rest of the Autonomous Communities. If someone knows how to add the small european map on the rest of them (and willing to), the problem is solved. I already tried to some days ago, but to manipulate svg's is beyond my comprehension... ;) --&lt;font style=&quot;font-family:Monotype Corsiva&quot;&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;[[User:Maurice27|MauritiusXXVII]] (&lt;font size=3&gt;[[User talk:Maurice27|Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!]]&lt;/font&gt;)&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/font&gt;. 07:40, 30 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Catalan vs. Catalonian ==<br /> <br /> Most of the article uses the word &quot;Catalan&quot; as an English demonym adjective in almost all cases. The article even states in the infobox itself that the English demonym is &quot;Catalan&quot;. However, the section on popular culture uses the demonym &quot;Catalonian&quot;. Which is correct, if any? Either the references to &quot;Catalonian&quot; need to be changed to &quot;Catalan&quot; or, alternatively, &quot;Catalonian&quot; should be recognised as a possible demonym. [[User:Madeinsane|Madeinsane]] ([[User talk:Madeinsane|talk]]) 18:57, 13 August 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> You're right. 'Catalonian' is incorrect, or at least not as correct as 'Catalan'. I've removed the former from the article. That said, the entire section on popular culture needs clearing up. It is very badly written and might also be split to a new page. Any thoughts? --[[User:Tomclarke|Tomclarke]] ([[User talk:Tomclarke|talk]]) 15:15, 20 October 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Goth-Alania &gt; Catalonia ==<br /> <br /> &quot;...the name of the Spanish province Catalonia, which is but a slight deformation of Goth-Alania, &quot;province of the Goths and Alans&quot;...&quot; (from ''Alans'', Encyclopaedia Iranica) http://www.iranica.com/newsite/index.isc?Article=http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/unicode/v1f8/v1f8a013.html [[User:Böri|Böri]] ([[User talk:Böri|talk]]) 14:12, 25 December 2009 (UTC)<br /> <br /> --This is not true at all, just a fantasy theory, the name Catalonia probably comes from Gothalunda/Gothland &gt; Catalunya or from Castelans(people who lives in castles)&gt; Castelunya &gt; Catalunya <br /> --[[Special:Contributions/79.159.194.238|79.159.194.238]] ([[User talk:79.159.194.238|talk]]) 17:11, 3 March 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == What ''is'' a nation, anyway? ==<br /> <br /> If you seek the answer to this question in ordinary English dictionaries, you’ll find entries like this:<br /> <br /> :a large aggregate of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular country or territory ''(Oxford New American Dictionary)''<br /> or<br /> :... '''1''' a body of people associated with a particular territory, that is sufficiently conscious of its unity to seek or to possess a government peculiarly its own ''(Webster’s Encyclopedic Dictionary)''<br /> <br /> or<br /> <br /> :... '''2''' a community of persons not constituting a state but bound by common descent, language, history, etc. ''(Collins English Dictionary)''<br /> <br /> So are Wikipedia editors entitled to describe Catalonia as a nation? On the basis of the foregoing, clearly they are. And what about the Spanish Constitutional Court? Well, neither they nor any other institution or legislature have any business to dictate English usage. Many editors (particularly some who are not native English speakers) have failed to take account of this fact. When the term “nation” is used in the context of Catalonia’s legal status, we need to make it quite clear in what sense it’s being used.<br /> <br /> Let me hasten to add that the foregoing mustn’t be taken to imply that I’m supporting a Catalanist position here: that would be to fall into exactly the sort of confusion between linguistic usage and legal definition that I'm criticizing.<br /> <br /> == Recent edit warring ==<br /> <br /> Look, this back and forth edit warring isn't really helping anything. You guys need to discuss it here. As an outsider with no stake in this, could I clarify a few points and ask people to follow them up below? There seem to be three main issues here -<br /> <br /> ===Nation/region/nationality etc in the lead, post court case===<br /> <br /> Per the above section, I don't think anyone can argue against the idea Catalonia is a &quot;nation&quot; in the broadest sense of the word - in the same way that is is also a &quot;region&quot;, and &quot;area&quot; or whatever, as well as more formally an &quot;Autonomous Community&quot;. The Spanish Constitutional Court ruling would also seem - according to the [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/spain/7861118/Catalonia-can-call-itself-a-nation-rules-Spains-top-court.html Telegraph piece] being cited - to have now more formally confirmed/accepted the use of the term &quot;nation&quot; in the latest Statute of Autonomy. However, it seems that they are saying that precisely because it is simply a vague cultural term that does not have a &quot;legal value&quot; or constitutional implications - ie it's accurate, but not that significant. The issue at stake is what to highlight and prioritise in the lead, and I'm not sure that simply sourcing to the Telegraph piece helps. That article also describes Catalonia as a &quot;region&quot;, and it's not clear on what basis one term is being preferred here over any other. It seems to me that using more formally defined terminology, where the terms wiki-link to pages about terms as they are used in a Spanish context - ie as in [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&amp;oldid=371840349 this version] - would be better.<br /> <br /> :I don't think this formula would work, because the list of Spain's &quot;constituent historical nationalities&quot; has never been laid out and, in any event, it would open a can of worms. One million pounds for those who try (and succeed on) it: would Navarre be part of the Basque nation? Is there a constituent nationality called Castile? If that's so, would Andalusia be part of it (it was part of Castile's Crown, after all..)? Etc, etc.<br /> <br /> :Nor can we accept, as some editor has pretended, that all of Spain's autonomous regions are nationalities. Madrid is an autonomous region, but neither a nation nor a nationality. The same goes for, let's say, Extremadura, Cantabria or Murcia. I'm sorry for being so blunt on the matter, but some of Spain's autonomous regions are nations whereas others are just that: regions. And we all know who's who on this.<br /> <br /> :The points are: <br /> <br /> ::(a) Catalonia's Autonomy Charter describes it as a nation (whether this is legally binding is of no importance: this is Wikipedia, not a constitutionalists' forum). This term ('nation') was sanctioned by (a) Catalonia's Parliament, (b) Spain's Parliament and (c) Catalonia's people in a referendum.<br /> <br /> ::(b) Spain's Constitutional Court has sanctioned its use (again: whether this is legally binding is of no importance: this is Wikipedia, not a constitutionalists' forum). <br /> <br /> ::(c) Countless English-language sources (and this is ''English'' Wikipedia, by the way) describe Catalonia as a nation. Those sources (for instance, The Daily Telegraph) can't be accused of any sort of nationalist leaning. Quite the contrary, as the Irish experience shows to us.<br /> <br /> [[User:Andreas Balart|Andreas Balart]] ([[User talk:Andreas Balart|talk]]) 08:27, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ===Order of languages===<br /> <br /> Is there a formal, agreed view in the real world of which of Catalan and Spanish is the &quot;main&quot; language, eg by virtue of official recognition as such within Catalonia and/or Spain as a whole, or are there official figures that reveal one language is more commonly spoken as a first language in Catalonia than the other? If so, the order should just follow that. If not, or there's no clear answer on those criteria, how about going by alphabetical order, ie Catalan first (although it would be slightly odd to apply this across all languages and put Aranese right at the top)?<br /> <br /> ===Parliament===<br /> <br /> It seems kind of obvious to me that the Parliament field in the infobox should refer to the Catalan parliament and link to that page, not to the national Spanish parliament. See [[Scotland]] for example.<br /> <br /> Anyway, those are my thoughts, if they help. There's plenty else that needs improving with the rest of the article, and genuine vandalism seems to slip by unnoticed while all this gets edit warred over. --&lt;small&gt;'''[[User:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;navy&quot;&gt;N-HH&lt;/font&gt;]]''' '''[[User talk:N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]/[[Special:Contributions/N-HH|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;edits&lt;/font&gt;]]'''&lt;/small&gt; 15:23, 5 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> :Dear '''N-HH''',<br /> <br /> :If anything this point demostrates the sort of people who've hijacked and taken over this article over the last months and years, masquerading their byass as ''consensus'': they were actually ''so'' byassed that they '''deleted any reference''' to Catalonia's Parliament on Catalonia's infobox. It beggars belief.<br /> <br /> :We can put it down to a whole set of prejudices. Otherwise, it is rather difficult to understand this behaviour.<br /> <br /> :For too many months, I've been watching over it. But enough is enough. <br /> <br /> :[[User:Andreas Balart|Andreas Balart]] ([[User talk:Andreas Balart|talk]]) 08:32, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Automate archiving? ==<br /> <br /> Does anyone object to me setting up automatic archiving for this page using MiszaBot? Unless otherwise agreed, I would set it to archive threads that have been inactive for 30 days and keep ten threads.--[[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] ([[User talk:Oneiros|talk]]) 20:43, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> :{{done}}--[[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] ([[User talk:Oneiros|talk]]) 13:47, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Spain high court rules against &quot;nation&quot; term ==<br /> <br /> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100710/ap_on_re_eu/eu_spain_catalan_charter &lt;span style=&quot;font-size: smaller;&quot; class=&quot;autosigned&quot;&gt;—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/75.85.14.106|75.85.14.106]] ([[User talk:75.85.14.106|talk]]) 02:14, 11 July 2010 (UTC)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;!-- Template:UnsignedIP --&gt; &lt;!--Autosigned by SineBot--&gt;<br /> <br /> :No credit shoud be paid to anonymous vandalist comments<br /> :[[User:Eva Grossjean|Eva Grossjean]] ([[User talk:Eva Grossjean|talk]]) 14:11, 11 July 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> == Catalonia is not a nation (at least legally) but a historical nationality. ==<br /> <br /> Spain's Constitutional Court accepts the definition as nation for Catalonia but has no legal value. For legal purposes is still considered a historical nationality and in any case should not be included within the framework of political status. Catalonia is only an autonomous region of Spain.</div>

Arkarull https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cause_c%C3%A9l%C3%A8bre&diff=372886358 2010-07-11T11:17:11Z

<p>Arkarull: </p> <hr /> <div>{{wiktionary|cause célèbre}}<br /> A ''{{lang|fr|'''cause célèbre'''}}'' (plural ''{{lang|fr|causes célèbres}}'', French-language for &quot;famous cause&quot;) &lt;!--A pronunciation for this French word would be good. A pronunciation of the English phrase would be better. --&gt;is an issue or incident arousing widespread controversy, outside campaigning and heated public debate.&lt;ref&gt;''[http://www.bartleby.com/59/4/causecelebre.html The New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy]''; third edition, 2002.&lt;/ref&gt; The term is particularly used in connection with celebrated legal cases.&lt;ref&gt;''[http://www.bartleby.com/61/31/C0173100.html The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language]''; fourth edition, 2000.&lt;/ref&gt; It is a [[List of French phrases|French phrase]] in common usage in [[English language|English]]. The phrase originated with the 37-volume ''[[Nouvelles Causes Célèbres]]'', published in 1763,<br /> Old French ([[Anglo-Norman]]) was the language of the legal profession in England, starting about 200 years after the Norman conquest in 1066 (the years 1275 - 1310), to about 1731. Some of the Old French used at that time ([[Law French]]) remains in use today as English pronounced Anglo-French words: &quot;appeal, attorney, bailiff, bar, claim, complaint, counsel, court, defendant, demurrer, evidence, indictment, judge, judgment, jury, justice, party, plaintiff, plea, plead, sentence, sue, suit, summon, verdict and [[voir dire]].&quot; While there are many French looking words, they may not correspond to Modern French (for example &quot;voir&quot; in voir dire is a completely different meaning. In this case also, the &quot;dĭr&quot; pronunciation of Modern French is washed in English to produce &quot;dīre&quot; which follows the rule of an English word ending in an &quot;e&quot; making the &quot;i&quot; long.&lt;ref name=&quot;legal French&quot;&gt;{{cite web |url=http://www.languageandlaw.org/NATURE.HTM|title=The Nature of Legal Language|accessdate=May 7, 2010|publisher=languageandlaw.org}}&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> <br /> ==References==<br /> {{reflist}}<br /> <br /> ==See also==<br /> *[[Landmark decision]]<br /> *[[List of French words and phrases used by English speakers]]<br /> *[[Media circus]]<br /> *[[Missing White Woman Syndrome]]<br /> <br /> {{language-stub}}<br /> <br /> {{DEFAULTSORT:Cause celebre}}<br /> [[Category:French words and phrases]]<br /> <br /> [[da:Cause célèbre]]<br /> [[lb:Cause célèbre]]<br /> [[nl:Cause célèbre]]<br /> [[pl:Cause célèbre]]<br /> [[fi:Cause célèbre]]<br /> [[sv:Cause célèbre]]<br /> [[es:Cause célèbre]]</div>

Arkarull