This article is within the scope of WikiProject Catalan-speaking Countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history, languages, and cultures of Catalan-speaking Countries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
The word 'Catalonia' or 'Catalunya' appear 68 times and the word 'Antoni' only 28.
That's just because he is refered as Gaudí in the text (over 300 times). Please notice also that Barcelona apeears more often than Catalonia in the text.--Pere prlpz (talk) 19:48, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Describing Gaudí as "Spanish Catalan" is a compromise that needs to stay in unless WP:CONSENSUS changes so please do not delete either word without discussing it here on the talk page. The other deletion was accompanied by a deceptive edit summary that claimed it was a revert due to a non-existing reference. There was no revert, it was an outright deletion of a well-referenced claim that was slightly garbled. I adjusted the wording so that it conforms to what the source says. The source is clearly readable through Google Books ebook access. Please do not make more controversial deletions without consensus here on the talk page. Elizium23 (talk) 14:09, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
Dear User, I happen to 'own' the referenced book. This is something that some editors on Wikipedia do not seem to realize. Books in paper also exist. This book, which is, in my opinion, influenced by the current nationalistic uproar of later times, does not state anywhere that Gaudí himself claimed either in writing or in any other way that he was personally supporting such a thing as "Catalonia statehood". Not in page 4, 25, or anywhere else. Hence revert. As for the so called consensus, I would like to know what you mean by that... Because as far as I see, there are no pages in WP where this happens. Catalan is NOT a nationality. At Picasso it does not say Spanish Andalusian, the same as in Barak Obama's article does not say that he is American Hawaiian. Wikipedia is full of people trying to use it for political reasons and this is a blatant example of it. Arcillaroja (talk) 14:38, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
It is a compromise solution that exists because of the very reason that Spanish nationalists persist in deleting the "Catalan" and Catalan nationalists persist in deleting the "Spanish" and there have been quite a few edit wars over this when some nationalist on whatever side barges in and insists on deleting information like so. So we would all appreciate if you adhere to WP:NPOV and not take a nationalistic side when editing the article, and please not edit-war against cnosensus before it changes, as you have already begun. Therefore I have deleted his nationality entirely, as it satisfies WP:OPENPARA well enough to say he is from Reus and a figurehead of Catalan modernism. How is that compromise? Elizium23 (talk) 15:54, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
I think it is a good option. I do not intend to adhere to any side. He was born in Spain. Whether he was born in the Canary Islands or in Catalonia is not really very informative for the average reader. The fact is that his figure is being used by certain sectors of political nationalism to create some sort of Catalan national identity which according to them should be in direct opposition to the Spanish national identity as a whole. If people want to promote their ideas is just fine, but please not in wikipedia. Thanks. Arcillaroja (talk) 19:04, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
Well, I do think that the original paragraph was perfectly okay (Spanish Catalan). It's very informative for the average reader. Where is the lack NPOV? The Scots are described as "Scottish" (not as "British", see David Hume), but I'm not in favor of describing Gaudí just as "Catalan" at all. Does the word "Catalan" offend you, Arcillaroja? Where's the Catalan nationalist bias? Is just saying that Catalonia exists (as a region, not state) nationalist bias? Please, don't say you're politically neutral, because you're not. I'm not goig to start an edit war, but I really think that Spanish Catalan is what the compromise should be, as Elizium23 first said. There was no problem at all. Thanks.--Fauban 13:01, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
Is this answer really intended for me? It seems to me that Fauban should improve his English knowledge before debating semantic nuances. Futhermore, the political constitution of the UK and of Spain are very different indeed. Perhaps the issue is in itself too close to the editor. In any case I find the option reached very good. And I think your decision of not warring regarding this is issue is wise. Arcillaroja (talk) 15:47, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
Arcillaroja, your English skills can't very good either, because when Elizium23 wrote: "Describing Gaudí as "Spanish Catalan" is a compromise that needs to stay in unless WP:CONSENSUS changes so please do not delete either word without discussing it here on the talk page [...]", you just edited the article to remove the word "Catalan" again. Did you even read (or understand) his post? How can you summarize this edit "as per talk page"? At least I can understand what has been written here, and it's not just about "semantics".
Then you wrote: "Perhaps the issue is in itself too close to the editor (= me, I guess)". Your edits show that you are a Spanish nationalist and an anti-Catalanist, so the issue is itself also very close to you. While everybody is entitled to his opinion, you cannot say you're neutral. Stop acting as if your ideology was the only right one. Maybe it's not your intention, but you sound prepotent, and your edits look biased.--Fauban 09:30, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
Dear, you do not need to insult or accuse me. It is not very constructive and does not add much to this discussion or to the article. Ad hominem assumptions don't work here. I try to neutralize nationalistic content. All nationalistic content. Assuming who I am and what my motivations are is counterproductive and also wrong. As you said before, you think that Catalonia (region) is very interesting and that people should know that it exist. Therefore it should be mentioned in the lede. This is an example of WP:UNDUE. Furthermore, Spanish Catalan does not mean much in common English. Because Spanish and Catalan are in two different categories hyperonomic/hyponomic. You see? When I say that your English might be slightly less suited for this kind of discussion, I mean that perhaps these nuances are a bit to difficult for you at this moment. I also think this because of the comments you state yourself about your English knowledge in your personal page. As I said before I think that the agreement reached so far is good as it is. Arcillaroja (talk) 09:12, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
Whatever, the one that started acting condescendingly was you. Your comments on the Catalan Way article talk page  speak by themselves, as the other contributors clearly saw and pointed out. But since you've already been unable to explain the edit you described "as per talk page", I've decided to stop feeding trolls.--Fauban 11:39, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
My cherished Fauban, you see? Just another baseless personal accusation... And again, not related to the article we are discussing. This all does not improve the whole matter very much, my friend. Once again I think, nevertheless, that your last decision is very appropriate. Arcillaroja (talk) 14:07, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
I'd like to know what is exactly wrong with "Antoni Gaudí i Cornet (Catalan pronunciation: [ənˈtɔni ɣəwˈði]; 25 June 1852 – 10 June 1926) was a Spanish architect born in Reus, in the Catalonia region of Spain," . I took it from a similar biographical article from Gauí that is also a very important Catalan artist from the 20th century. My objection with Spanish Catalan is that it does not mean anything in English. Therefore I feel that the wording of the Dalí article would be more appropriate. Arcillaroja (talk) 08:58, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
Well, I speak English natively, and it is clear to me what "Spanish Catalan" means. It is a nod to the fact that he enjoyed Spanish citizenship but also Catalan nationality and it is a compromise between nationalists who always wish to call him only Spanish (like the above) and nationalists who wish to call him only Catalan (who have not appeared here lately). There is a chronic edit war and content dispute among these two sets of nationalists. The only way to prevent this is to use compromise wording, which of course you object to because it mentions his Catalan nationality. I am sorry but this is the consensus and I will not change my position. Elizium23 (talk) 14:26, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
I'm sorry your are not willing to rethink your position. I'm not a Spanish nationalist but believe what you want. I honestly thought that the formula used for Salvador Dalí's lede (One of the greatest masters of his time, and a very Catalan character indeed) would be better. The fact is that Dalí's figure has not been claimed by Nationalists because he was very controversial and scorned nationalist (from every side) on several occasions. Hence, not interesting for the Catalan cause and therefore no problem in calling him a Spaniard born in Catalonia in Wikipedia.
Gaudí, on the other hand was closer to a nationalistic approach and therefore he is more suitable for the nationalistic cause. That's why we have the awkward Spanish Catalan formula or consensus or whatever you want to called it. You tell me why the one figure has no pressure in regards to its nationality and the other one does... it's not good for this article and it is not good for wikipedia as a whole. In my view this is clearly controversial and it should be avoided. That you want to make a clear distinction between nationality and statehood in the lede is VERY controversial in it self. Just don't. He was Spanish and was born in Catalonia. That is a fact. The other definitions do enter in disputes and controversies. Just don't.... Arcillaroja (talk) 11:11, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
If there is no answer then we should go ahead with the edit? It seems not very stable indeed Arcillaroja (talk) 08:35, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
No, you are the only one arguing for it, and you do not have consensus. Elizium23 (talk) 17:15, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Don't see any consensus here! if you can't bring any other argumetns il edit the lede accordingly Arcillaroja (talk) 08:23, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Indeed there is clearly NO consensus to remove or change the phrase (Spanish Catalan). So with the lack of consensus the lede is not to be changed from that. Arnoutf (talk) 19:04, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
Where the outcome is inconclusive. In other words, there is no strong support for changing article status quo. A single editor doing that nonetheless is pretty close to claiming ownership (WP:OWN) of that topic.
Also I am familiar with Wikipedia not being a democracy. It is to easy to outvote common sense based on a quickly compiled survey to which supporters are invited. For that reason we do want consensus (ie general agreement, or at least no continued objection) to change long standing texts, once they are opposed. In this case the phrase "Catalan Spanish" was the long standing version, and there is clearly no consensus to change that. Arnoutf (talk) 17:19, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
This talk thread was noted in an RfC and I wanted to bring another perspective to the discussion here. It appears clear that there is a single editor pushing a POV. I am in full agreement with consensus that Spain is the country of birth and Catalan is the nationality - recognized as such by both Spain and Catalonia - and therefore Spanish Catalan is the apt term. No factual argument has been presented by the other side as to why this should not be the case. A lot of verbiage, but no factual argument. Factchecker25 (talk) 12:47, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
Factchecker25, I have answered you at the RfC. Please keep a friendly tone. It would be useful to keep discussing it in a single location. In any case I'm open to discussion. As i said in thee RfC, Catalonia it is not a nation (in the legal sense, according to the Spanish constitution). And please refrain yourself, this is present fact, not my opinion. The question of historic nationalities is highly controversial. My opinion, is that we could avoid the whole thing by mentioning the place of birth. The whole question of nationality is rather irrelevant and only promotes the discussion. I don't think that Wikipedia should take part on this. Spanish Catalan implies that there are two nations, and at this moment, according to the constitution, this is not the case. Arcillaroja (talk) 13:15, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
Most nations are ethnic which is a anthropological/sociological not a legal definition (A nation state is not the same as a nation). Recognition of Catalonia's Statues of Autonomy seems to allow capture this.
The place of birth might be relevant if it is at least as notable as Moscow or New York, otherwise it holds about as much information as mentioning "Lutjebroek" as place of birth. Arnoutf (talk) 17:03, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
The Spanish constitution recognizes three nationalities: Galician, Basque, and Catalan. The statutes of autonomy of Catalonia also recognizes Catalan as a nationality. Therefore, it is appropriate to refer to someone as Catalan. Encyclopedias do not deal in implications, but realities, and the reality is that a person born in Catalonia is considered both Spanish, due to being born within the borders of Spain, and Catalan, due to ALSO being born within a historically distinct region of Spain with its own unique history, heritage, and customs. The consensus from other editors clearly agrees with this position. Factchecker25 (talk) 01:03, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
Dear Factchecker25. Not only those "nationalities" are recognized by the Spanish constitution. Also others such as Andalusia are recognized as "nationalities". Yet, I don't see that Pablo Picasso is a "Spanish Andalusian" painter. I see a tendentious use of Wikipedia in order to promote National identity. But that is my opinion, of course. What is not my opinion is the fact that the reform of the statute of Catalonia was rejected by the constitutional court because the word "nation" was mentioned in it. The articles containing this word were derogated. I honestly think that it is wrong to take a stand in all this discussion. Why not setting a neutral wording? Arcillaroja (talk) 18:39, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
Arcillaroja: (1) Per your own comment: Discuss this at a single location
(2) This is not the Picasso article, so any talk about that article should be done there.
(3) I do not believe the English word "nation" was mentioned in any Spanish statute. If you claim the use of that word was reason for rejecting, please provide a source that claims that. Arnoutf (talk) 18:47, 10 May 2014 (UTC)