Jump to content

Talk:Valley of the Fallen

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

For older talk see

"Many of these prisoners never enjoyed freedom, since there were no safety procedures, so accidents were a daily occurrence and often fatal. During the 18-year construction period 14 workers died."

- That doesn't make sense.

63.215.27.199 03:51, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The introductory paragraph doesn't say exactly what the monument is...one has to read before one learns that soldiers are buried there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.245.162.5 (talk) 20:07, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article is lying

[edit]

Quote: "Those buried in the Valley of the Fallen, however, are thousands of Nationalist soldiers; the few former Republicans buried there were added among the collection of unknown soldiers assembled from temporary graves at the end of the war."

That's not true, most of thouse buried in the Valley are actually reds...: More than 30,000 out of 50,000 are republican soldiers. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.53.73.100 (talk) 15:09, 23 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

"most of thouse buried in the Valley are actually reds" I think the wording here makes it pretty obvious what this anonymous commenter's allegiances are. jae (talk) 12:18, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
User:Jae why are you replying to a 15 year old comment? Mztourist (talk) 07:54, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Edits of 9 May 2007

[edit]

I made a few changes today to the last version left by User:Camelotescorial. Much of it was commas and grammar/punctuation in general. Among other things, I also:

1. Switched the Franco reference back to a simple "dictator." That's the important title; adding "general" interrupts the flow of the sentence and isn't really important in an article that isn't directly about Franco (what next? "Spanish fascist Christian caucasian dictator Generalissimo Francisco Franco Bahamonde"?). Anyone who wants biographical information will click the link and will soon discover Franco's military credentials.

2. Removed the link to Basilica de la Santa Cruz del Valle de los Caidos. As you can see from this page's talk archives, it was decided at one point to combine the valley and basilica articles into one "Valle de los Caidos" article.

3. Removed the below text from the start of the article:

El Valle de los Caídos redirects from here to the municipalities of San Lorenzo de El Escorial, Madrid, El Escorial, Madrid, Monasterio de El Escorial and La Granjilla de La Fresneda de El Escorial, Madrid

It's impossible to have more than one redirect target for one page; and in any case, it isn't true; that page doesn't redirect to any of those pages (it was a redlink when I found it; I made it a redirect to this page). I considered putting these links under a "See also" heading, but didn't see the point: there's already a link to San Lorenzo within the text, and there's a link to El Escorial within the text.

4. Changed the former "Basilica and cross"/"Basilica de la Santa Cruz (etc.)" heading to read "Basilica, abbey and cross" to more accurately reflect the section's contents. ``` W i k i W i s t a h W a s s a p 21:32, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chronology of the monuments

[edit]

What year have the monuments been built? When were they finished? It is not clearly stated in the article. Ferred (talk) 11:09, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[Visiting From Madrid] [Section] Proposed Deletion

[edit]

While helpful, this section in my view has no place in an encyclopedia. If anyone disagrees just let me know. I'll delete it in a week from this date if nobody is in disagreement.

The Anonymous IP 86.45.134.172 might log in before doing a lot of deleting anywhere.--Wetman (talk) 09:57, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[Editions March 2010] [section]

[edit]

Removed reference to M Sullivan as not fully true and misleading - Franco's burial at the monument was decided 25 years after completion by the King of Spain. The dicator never intended to conmemorate his memory in a Monument dedicated to the fallen during the Civil War, as he was not one of them.

Removed reference to 20,000 political prisioners participating during construction as not an established fact.

Included Chronology and some factual data on the monument. —Preceding unsigned comment added by El Cid Cabreador (talk • contribs) 14:02, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Franco was buried the day after the King was designated as such. Do you mean Franco's grave was built in a single day? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.170.98.99 (talk) 18:07, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Previous editions included links to exemplify one side of the public opinion, which claims that the partial closure of the abbey is due to a political decision of president Zapatero's government. The controversy includes opinions supporting that the closure is due to accident risk during the restoration works and that the political aspect is a misinterpretation. In order to complete the controversy picture, a link is added supporting also the second point of view. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.83.20.184 (talk) 09:19, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Still, the objectivity of the article is in question, violating NPOV. Wording such as "At November of 2010 the Spanish goverment placed armed checkpoints and patrols to prevent any Christian to enter to mass at Sunday; and the monks have had to stop the mass at basilica to celebrate the mass at the open field, outside the church, out the last chekpoint where the Christians can reach. [5]", aside from being bad English, clearly tries to make a statement of fact. I believe it should be edited and will proceed to do so. --Gandalf57 (talk) 14:02, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There were armed checkpoints during several weeks. And the mass was celebrated at a forest by one of the checkpoints. (http://www.libertaddigital.com/sociedad/valle-de-los-caidos-cerrado-por-orden-gubernativa-1276406927/). This Sunday there was too much people, and the civil governor had had to allow to celebrate the mass at the main square. That is a fact that it is hard to hide. And "the mass is traditionally associated with Francoist commemorations", is an opinion. That is wrong, so fact there is there an abbey there that has his mass there. Are you saying that the monks are Francoist, and that the chirstians that goes to church there are Francoist? Do you know that any Francoist sign on that Basilica is strictly forbidden? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.17.91.255 (talk) 21:56, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"A somewhat Controversial Monument" - very misleading title

[edit]

Given all the debates in recent years about the Valley of the Fallen, the word "somewhat" is very misleading and also quite belittling of those who feel very strongly that the monument is morally wrong. There are many who are outraged that the monument still exists and that its upkeep is funded by taxpayer money, many of whom have personally suffered during Francos dictatorship, or who have lost family members. It is high time to revise this section and especially its title. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.244.73.58 (talk) 22:08, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I also think that the article hides the obviously fascist architectural features of the monument behind innocuous titles such as "neo-Herrerian" or neo-classicism in the style of Mussolini and Speer. Let's call a spade a spade. This is fascist architecture. --Gandalf57 (talk) 13:38, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've never been there, but the photo given here looks remarkably non-Fascist, remarkably "first-half 20th century Catholic architecture", compared with, say, the Vittoriano which was even only completed under Fascism, or, say, the Art House, Munich.--2001:A61:2127:AA01:207A:6328:11C4:BDF5 (talk) 00:07, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
many catholics would not agree, because of the obviously faschist aesthetics of this „monument“. 89.14.27.20 (talk) 22:00, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Another 'inaccuracy'...

[edit]

In 1964, as a child of 11, I traveled extensively in Spain and visited the valley, both inside and walking the hillside above the entrance. When I commented favorably on the dedication to all the victims of the Civil War, I was told bluntly:

(a) it was built as a mausoleum by and for Franco (11 years before his death!) and,
(b) it had been built with slave labor, by political prisoners.

Since Wikipedia did not exist at the time, I was unaware of the need for a written source to be cited. Nonetheless this article should be cited for POV and not enough sources. Shir-El too 20:30, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Valle de los Caídos. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:13, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Valle de los Caídos. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:34, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Exhumation

[edit]

I have made the change today. Reuters states the legal mechanism has been put in motion to exhume remains and rebury elsewhere. Mike Galvin (talk) 17:18, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 16 August 2020

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved. I did enjoy the banter between Yaksar and IIO below... It would be very easy for us if all we had to do at RMs was copy the first sentence from the article, case closed. Sadly it's not the case though, and consensus here seems to be that English sources use the English language rendition, in contrast to Arc de Triomphe etc  — Amakuru (talk) 17:27, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Valle de los Caídos → Valley of the Fallen – Our titling policy does not require us to use English language names, but does say to use the names most common in English language sources. The Valley of the Fallen is largely called by its English name in those reliable sources. In recent coverage surrounding Franco's exhumation, for example, English news stories were all using the English name, while a search for the current title brings up pretty much just Spanish language ones. The Spanish title is certainly also used in English sources, but less commonly so (it can be telling that, outside of the Spanish language sources in the reference section, our own article already chooses to mostly use the English title. Yaksar (let's chat) 15:08, 16 August 2020 (UTC)—Relisting. Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 11:46, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose The Valle de los Caídos (Spanish pronunciation: [ˈbaʎe ðe los kaˈiðos], "Valley of the Fallen") is a Catholic basilica and a monumental memorial in the municipality of San Lorenzo de El Escorial, erected at Cuelgamuros Valley in the Sierra de Guadarrama, near Madrid. Why would we give it an English translation? In ictu oculi (talk) 15:05, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure why copying and pasting the first sentence of the article would affect that. Or do you feel that because the Leaning Tower of Pisa is the campanile of the cathedral of the Italian city of Pisa and the third-oldest structure in the city's Piazza dei Miracoli, we should be using Torre pendente di Pisa?--Yaksar (let's chat) 16:30, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    To illustrate the naturalness of the article title from the current lead. As the Pisa lead demonstrates by contrast. If we want a book then The Rough Guide to Spain 2018 "El Valle de los Caídos is probably the most controversial and emotive physical expression of the Francoist dictatorship that still remains in present-day Spain. " etc. In ictu oculi (talk) 21:01, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    That's just silly. You know when a move happens the lead is typically adjusted to reflect that, right? If Eiffel Tower had the French name first in its intro, we wouldn't then argue that we must therefore ignore our title policy and change the page name to reflect that.--Yaksar (let's chat) 21:13, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - as this is (I thought) the English language Wikipedia. GoodDay (talk) 23:57, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • It is, but just to avoid confusion, that does not mean there is a universal rule to use only English titles. To reuse an example, we use Eiffel Tower rather than Tour Eiffel because that is what English language sources predominantly use, just as we say Arc de Triomphe because that is what English sources predominantly use. In this case, the English title is the more used one so it would fall into the former category.--Yaksar (let's chat) 13:58, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Usage of the translated form in English language sources seems pretty dominant. Walrasiad (talk) 01:10, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Proposed split: Exhumation and removal of Franco's remains

[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was to split the article. – MaterialWorks ping me! 16:09, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I propose that the section Exhumation and removal of Franco's remains be split into a separate page called Exhumation and reburial of Francisco Franco. The section is very long and quite hard to navigate so it meets the criteria for splitting and both the section and the incident itself, as well as the background and consequences of the incident, are very thoroughly cited so I would argue it meets the notability guidelines for its own article. Fiabx (talk) 21:57, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: title may need rethinking as prime fascist mover José Antonio Prima de Rivera also removed, April 2023. See Jones, Sam (23 April 2023). "Body of Spain's fascist party founder to be removed from basilica". The Guardian. Pol098 (talk) 11:28, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 23 June 2023

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. By weight of the arguments and policy, there is consensus that an official name change is insufficient without additional evidence that it has become the common name. (non-admin closure) {{replyto|SilverLocust}} (talk) 06:52, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Valley of the Fallen → Valley of Cuelgamuros – WP:COMMONNAME, the official name has changed. — DaddyCell (talk) 18:07, 21 June 2023 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). 162 etc. (talk) 18:12, 23 June 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. Adumbrativus (talk) 06:16, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Valley_of_the_Fallen&oldid=1210067687"