Talk:Catalonia

Infobox

I request to improve the infobox and use the same type than Quebec or Scotland. — Jɑuмe ^(dis-me) 01:58, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

This autonomous community is not Scotland or Quebec, is one more region of Spain. The rest of communities have the same type of map. Please, you stop the vandalism. Satesclop 04:15, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Agree with Satesclop.--Karljoos (talk) 14:32, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

I would like to notify Satesclop has exercised canvassing — Jɑuмe ^(dis-me) 06:41, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Agree with Satesclop. Mr KEBAB (talk) 09:55, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Agree with Jaume. Lliure albir (talk) 16:58, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Agree with Jaume. By the way, Jaume, I used your Metro stop the other day, Jaume I. I sure am glad though that there are a legion of Americans who are willing to share with us what the political situation is like in our home country. Where would the world be without Americans dictating terms, and instructing us uncivilized folk. 79.158.167.31 (talk) 19:04, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

I think the Statute of Autonomy date should be Agoust 2010, because then it was published in its final version. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 153.96.151.103 (talk) 09:29, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Agree with Jaume. Satesclop seems to infer that Catalonia is less of a state than Quebec, yet before the referendum, it was one of the three Spanish "historical nations" (The Basque Country, Galicia and Catalonia) which have a different status to the other regions of Spain, so Satesclop is wrong in his/her assertion that it is "one more region of Spain" like, let's say, Andalusia or Castille. Add to this that Catalonia has also undertaken a referendum in which 90% of voters voted "yes" (whereas they voted "no" in Scotland and Quebec), and surely this makes Catalonia even more of a state than Quebec, certainly not less. Also, Satesclop, you seem to be rude. Please let's be amicable about this.

Viliro. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.186.200.46 (talk) 06:03, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Infobox change

The following discussion 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 infobox

Comunidad de Cataluña, perteneciente a España Comunidad de Cataluña, perteneciente a España (Catalan) Comunidad de Cataluña (Spanish) Flag Coat of arms Location of Catalonia (dark green) in Europe (dark grey) Status Disputed Capital and largest city Barcelona Official languages Catalan, Occitan (Aranese), Spanish, Catalan Sign Language (also recognised) Demonym(s) Catalan [català, -ana] Error: {{Lang}}: text has italic markup (help) (ca) [catalán, -ana] Error: {{Lang}}: text has italic markup (help) (es) [catalan, -a] Error: {{Lang}}: text has italic markup (help) (oc) Government Unitary presidential constitutional republic • President Carles Puigdemont Legislature Generalitat of Catalonia Formation • Formation 988 (Catalan Counties) 1137 (Union with Aragon) 1283 (Catalan constitutions) 1516 (Dynastic union with Castile under Charles V) 1716 (Nueva Planta decrees abolishes Catalan institutions) • Statute of Autonomy 9 September 1932 18 September 1979 9 August 2006 (current version) • Independence from Spain 9 October 2017 Area • Total 32,108 km2 (12,397 sq mi) Population • 2017 estimate 7,522,596 • Density 234/km2 (606.1/sq mi) GDP (PPP) estimate • Total $336.162 billion • Per capita $255.204 billion Time zone UTC+1 (CET) Internet TLD .cat Website gencat.cat

Catalonia may declare independence next Monday so i created a proposed infobox above. This is preliminary. Wrestlingring (talk) 02:06, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

OH YES! YES! YES! YES! YES!!! Thank you very much! Your Infobox looks so beautiful and true. LONG LIVE República de Catalunya!!! 2001:8003:8665:7D00:B0D9:F1D:4BF8:DF04 (talk) 08:11, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

I have created a new location map of Catalonia and made the following changes to the infobox — added status which would obviously be disputed for now. --Saqib (talk) 07:03, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

References

You can't just take Infobox settlement and put Infobox country on top of it, they don't contain the same fields. Click 'edit' above and then click the Preview button, all of those errors need fixing before this template will work properly. - X201 (talk) 08:05, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

@X201:. I have fixed it. --Saqib (talk) 08:19, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

@Saqib: Thanks - X201 (talk) 09:20, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

In terms of NPOV, perhaps the Donetsk People's Republic infobox [1] is the best template? Culloty82 (talk) 12:07, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Donetsk also uses country infobox so why do you think the proposed infobox for post-independence Catalonia is not neutral? If you meant the Donetsk infobox contains less fields, I think it is due to non-availability of data. --Saqib (talk) 18:57, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Only change needed would be to change "Disputed" to "Unrecognised state. Recognised by UN as part of Spain" to highlight likely de facto and de jure situations. Culloty82 (talk) 13:13, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Oppose doing this immediately after any declaration; we should wait at least 48-72 hours to see what reaction occurs. Catalan Republic may be a suitable page to include this infobox now. power~enwiki (π, ν) 19:10, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

NO. I can't wait any longer. Today is the longest day in my life, tomorrow I will be reborn. 2001:8003:8665:7D00:B0D9:F1D:4BF8:DF04 (talk) 08:15, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Oppose. Although they make the declaration, it will be unilateral and unrecognized. The opinions of the ip 2001:8003:8665:7D00:B0D9:F1D:4BF8:DF04|2001:8003:8665:7D00:B0D9:F1D:4BF8:DF04 should not be taken into account, due to a clear WP:COI as shown for their words. --BallenaBlanca (Talk) 11:25, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Support infobox suggestion from Wrestlingring. In response to issues raised by BallenaBlanca, I agree that it will be unilateral, and it may be unrecognised, but the original poster labelled its status as disputed, so my thoughts are that listing it as disputed would cover your concern. StLis 220.245.138.58 (talk) 06:09, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Oppose Per WP:CBALL. There is not even a declaration yet. Currently it is a region of Spain and would continue to be after an eventual declaration that the courts have confirmed would be illegal and without effect. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 22:21, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Today's implemented, but promptly suspended, declaration will hardly clarify the debate! Culloty82 (talk) 20:24, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose as per Power~enwiki, BallenaBlanca and Crystallizedcarbon. Impru20 (talk) 20:36, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose. Catalonia's president hasn't clarified on whether or not Catalonia has declared independence and tomorrow is when the deadline is over. Mr.McCloud 15:06, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

@Enterprise599: It is now almost a given as the PM is going to strip Catalonia of its autonomy. I don't think the pro independence Catalonians are just going to shrug their shoulders and say "oh well... its back to Spain we go". - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:48, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Ha. Genetically - good grief. They are the same as the rest of the Spanish population, except for the Basques - who truly are different from the rest of the country. This is just Catalan nationalism run amok. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.111.59.83 (talk) 12:31, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

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.

Independence announcement now almost certain

Editors here should prepare for a Catalonia country article as the Spanish prime minister just announced that he is revoking the regions autonomy. This action will strip the president of his powers and with it a call for new elections.[2] - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:40, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

My proposal is that we handle this one like Crimea for neutrality: Autonomous Republic of Crimea vs Republic of Crimea. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:43, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

My proposal is just to wait until seeing what happens instead of pre-arranging what should be done. The Autonomous Republic of Crimea was the name of the region as an autonomous republic within Ukraine, whereas Republic of Crimea is the name of the subject under Russian control. Nothing similar to that would happen here, and first of all, we should first address the actual relevance of any eventual independence before going on to create an entirely separate article. As of now, any data covering any self-proclaimed independent Catalonia could very well be worked into both this and the Catalan Republic article. Impru20 (talk) 17:03, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

The worst thing that could happen if an article is prepare in draft-space is that it isn't needed then deleted. I agree with you about waiting to see what happens but being prepared isn't a bad thing to do here. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:07, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

The Spanish government is preparing the military - there won't be any "independence" - there might very well be a massacre of large numbers of the extremist population, however. Friends of mine in Spain say the mood in the rest of the country is pretty ugly against the independence movement - and when an army is in an ugly mood, watch out. I suspect we'll be editing this article soon with a most unpleasant set of Reliable Source'd news items. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.111.59.83 (talk) 12:28, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Acting upon almost certainty is still crystal balling. It was also almost certain Clinton would win the 2016 elections. Let's just wait. Arnoutf (talk) 17:20, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Which is why we have Userspace draft. I am trying not to have this article become a mess. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:24, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

unreferenced mess

What the heck happened here? "Christianity, attested in the 3rd century, was completed in urban areas in the 4th century. Although it remains under Roman rule and does not go under the rule of Vandals, Swabians and Alans in the 5th century, the main cities suffered frequent sacking and some desurbanization." - not only does this not make sense in English, but it needs a source. Badly. 50.111.59.83 (talk) 07:17, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

NNPOV Issue on post-2014 section

As currently written, the post-2014 section of this article takes the "line" of the Spanish government, rather than reflecting a neutral point of view as to whether Catalonia should be independent of not. Kenneth Burch

Can you clarify what this "line" is? - 02:09, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

What has happened to the first section of this article?

There was a section which, though not perfectly worded, gave a link to the "Republic of Catalonia" article, stating that the situation is currently in flux. It appears that someone deleted that, and I can't see any discussion here to that effect (just the suggestion to rename this article, which was defeated). Could someone please add the link back, perhaps with better wording this time? I would suggest something along the lines of "For the term to be used in the event of a declaration of independence from Spain, see 'Republic of Catalonia'". *Violet* 220.245.138.58 (talk) 04:26, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Republic of Catalonia is a redirect to Catalan Republic, which is just a disambiguation page. It disambiguates between several articles about historic "Catalan Republics". There is no article about a term to be used in the event of a declaration of independence from Spain. Vanjagenije (talk) 15:46, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalan_Republic_(2017) - though the article looks much better now, in any case, but may I would like to suggest we change "the Generalitat de Catalunya, which views it as an independent republic following a unilateral declaration [...]" to "the Republica de Catalunya, which views it as an independent republic following a unilateral declaration [...]".

Apart from that, it is showing both sides and states that the situation is in flux. 59.167.198.191 (talk) 05:01, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Catalonia has now declared independence

I think the editors should refrain themselves from constantly changing these articles. The declaration of independence has been passed with half the members of the Catalan Parlament absent. This was caused to the voting being illegal not only under Spanish law, but also under Catalonian procedure. The declaration of independence has been proclaimed by three political parties that do not represent the people of Catalonia. Thus, the absence of international recognition.

Catalonian Parliament has no power to declare the independence of the region, as the Spanish Constitutional Court has stated repeteadly. The day I declare the independence of London, will London be independent?

shouldnt the map of spain show catalonia in a ligher colour to show the ambiguousness of its status as part of spain?

No. I think an analogous article could be created though, such as Catalan Republic (1931), Catalan State (1934) and so on. But this article is centered on the region and (still) autonomous community of Catalonia, as Spanish law are still into force. Impru20 (talk) 13:43, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Hmmmmm when you look up Spain it doesn't come up Kingdom of Spain, why would the same go for independent Catalonia? AHC300 (talk) 13:46, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

You surely haven't seen the Spain article, right? "Kingdom of Spain" is clearly stated in both the lead and the infobox (but "Spain" is used in the article title as per WP:COMMONNAME). This article refers to the geographical region of Catalonia. As an example, check Crimea as opposed to Republic of Crimea or even Autonomous Republic of Crimea. Impru20 (talk) 13:55, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

So should we make this article about the geographic region, then have 2 separate articles for the Autonomous Community and the Republic? Ethanmayersweet (talk) 14:02, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Or maybe we should wait until seeing what happens. If Article 155 is enforced in full, independence may be short-lived and merely symbolic, and there would be no need for a separate article for the autonomous community. If it eventually turned into a full-fledged state (even if unrecognized), then something like what is done for Kosovo/Autonomous Province of Kosovo and Metohija could be worked out. But then, I suggest for us to wait and see; Wikipedia is not a newspaper, so we are not in a hurry to do it before seeing what the actual outcome is. Impru20 (talk) 14:14, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

I'd support showing Catalonia as a republic in the article, but heavily noting that this status is disputed. Ethanmayersweet (talk) 13:49, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Since Catalonia has declared independence, perhaps we can do as EthanMayer suggested? This seems to make sense. It recognizes that the event occurred, but also recognized that international recognition has not occurred - or had time to occur yet for that matter. Then we will hopefully not have to make too abrupt of changes as further events unfold, whatever they may be. MarkJerue (talk) 14:11, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

I think the current proposal of showing Catalonia as a disputed territory and mentioning that parliament voted for independence on 27 October 2017 is fine for now. However, once Article 155 is enforced, what should we do? Impru20 (talk) 14:26, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps we can then give treatment to the article per what we have set up on the Crimea page, Western Sahara page, or any of the other pages involving disputed territory? Although if this independence movement is scrapped, then we would have to rework the page more. I suspect the experience on this page will be helpful in the coming hours: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Russian_Federation MarkJerue (talk) 14:32, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Other editors, what are your thoughts? It seems based purely on WP:N(E) we should list this event somewhere on this page as, regardless of outcome, it will be mentioned in "History of Catalonia" textbooks and essays in the coming years. We need opinions before we see Crimea-esque edits coming onto this page. MarkJerue (talk) 14:40, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

We can say that the Catalan Parliament has approved a declaration by which they start to take steps towards the independence, which is not going to happen in any case. That's the most that can be said. From all points of view, Catalonia is a region of Spain.

Can someone edit this nonsense of disputed territory? Has anyone actually read what the Catalan Parliament has approved? https://www.scribd.com/document/362773786/Texto-de-la-Declaracion-de-Independencia They "start a process". So even if this was legal, which isn't from any point of view, they have not declared the independence. You just have to read.

Even if Catalonia were a republic (which is not yet), that flag is not official!! https://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandera_de_Catalunya

I would say we balance both points of view and state that the status is different in different opinions.Tart (talk) 15:45, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

For now, let's just agree that the issue of where Catalonia belongs is disputed. The Scribd doc above link states clearly "[w]e constitute the Catalan Republic as an independent state...". The passage of "start a process" refers to the writing of the constitution. I agree that we should leave out the flag issue for now.

The initial passage of the article and infobox needs to reflect that the Spanish central govt and the Catalan govt/parliament hold different views of the status of Catalonia. The map should be removed or changed, for now.

In a few days the situation will be more clear. As it is likely that we will have two contending authorities, the Catalan govt (claiming Catalonia as republic) and whatever authority is imposed from Madrid, we may opt to split the article in three, 1) on Catalonia as a historical/cultural region, 2) the Catalan Republic and 3) the autonomous community of Catalonia. --Soman (talk) 17:15, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

News sources are saying they have declared independence. Although this doesn't make it a solid fact, it shows that people are justified in editing the document to reflect that it's AT LEAST disputed or unrecognized. 209.160.129.5 (talk) 17:21, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Declaration

HAHAHA Crazy wikipediers, you yourself decide what is true and what not xDD Republic of Catalonia with an invented flag... Pufff Wikipedia, I thought at least the English version was more impartial on this issues but no... El parlamento no tiene competencias para proclamar la republica. La declaracion no es valida. Revertir los cambios.

Please speak English in this encyclopedia. Georgia guy (talk) 14:23, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

The parliament has no powers to proclaim the republic. The declaration is not valid. Revert the changes. --83.60.39.106 (talk) 14:24, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Oppose Contributions by 83.60.39.106 are clearly favoured in the view of the Spanish Government, articles should have a neutral point of view Ethanmayersweet (talk) 14:38, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Oppose' * Virtually no country in the world that became independent had the kind of legal power you refer to. Belgium unilaterally declared independence of Netherlands after user of violence (Belgian parlement had no official/legal power within the Netherlands), Slovenia became independent of Yugoslavia (it's parlement did not have the legal power within Yugoslavia),... are Belgian and Slovenia's declarations of independence suddenly not valid? We would need to change the status of all unilateral declared independent countries to be neutral if we would follow you're logic... --Niele~enwiki (talk) 14:47, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Agree with unregistered user. It's to soon to be changing the status of the region in accordance with the decrees of the local government. Wait for this to play out in international law. Colonel Mustard (talk) 14:52, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

The European Union itself denies the validity of the declaration of independence --83.60.39.106 (talk) 14:40, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

http://www.elmundo.es/cataluna/2017/10/27/59f34298ca474100358b4683.html Reference --83.60.39.106 (talk) 14:41, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Como bien apunta Niele, no es necesario el reconocimiento tanto español como internacional para añadir el apunte de que el Parlament ha declarado la independencia unilateral. As Niele points out, it is not necessary for Catalonia to be recognised by Spain neither internationally. It can be noted that the Parliament of Catalonia has declared the unilateral independence.

It's noted twice with the same source in the opening paragraphs. I suggest someone removes the second statement (that Catalonia unilaterally declared independence from the bottom). Maswimelleu (talk) 14:52, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Page protected 2017-10-27

I have just fully protected this page for 7 days, because it is the subject of a content dispute (see WP:FULL). This means that it can bed edited only by administrators.

Editors who wish to change the article should explain their propose changes on this talk page. Adding the template {{Edit fully-protected}} talk page will draw the attention of administrators for implementing uncontroversial changes, or changes for which a consensus has been established. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:54, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

I would further remind people that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia with a neutral point of view. Since there are no sources that can currently definitively state what the political situation of Catalonia is, no reasonable edits in that direction can be made at this time. If you would like to help a Wikimedia project, consider WikiNews. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:11, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Article 155 has been enacted

^ JOSHBLY (talk) 14:58, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

...and its results say that... Georgia guy (talk) 14:59, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 27 October 2017 (3)

Having "Republic of Catalonia (unrecognized)" in the infobox is reactionary and misleading. Spain may take direct control of the government today or shortly. Very fluid situation. Remove these 4 words and flag. Legacypac (talk) 15:09, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Well, a news source I just read says that Catalonia's declaration of independence is considered to be "in effect a symbolic gesture as it will not be accepted by Spain or the international community". I think using "Republic of Catalonia (unrecognized)" is SOP for Wikipedia, isn't it? At least until the diapers are removed from this infant republic.  Paine Ellsworth  ^put'r there  15:25, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

@Legacypac Some would consider that an invasion of an independent country considering this result was reached democratically. Wikipedia not a print encyclopedia. Mainline421 (talk) 15:27, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

References

 Not done If you want to make non-trivial edit, establish the consensus first, then make a request. Vanjagenije (talk) 17:29, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 27 October 2017 (4)

Add these categories so as not to show any bias during this dispute.

[[Category:Southwestern European countries]] [[Category:Spanish-speaking countries and territories]] [[Category:Countries in Europe]] [[Category:Liberal democracies]] Mainline421 (talk) 15:11, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Bad idea. Let's see how this shakes out first. Legacypac (talk) 15:13, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

 Not done This is disputed. Please seek consensus for this change. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 15:17, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

@Legacypac @Zzuuzz Not doing so shows bias towards the Spanish government's side of the current dispute though. Catalonia is currently considered an independent country by the Catalonian government and most of its citizens if the result of the referendum is anything to go by. Mainline421 (talk) 15:19, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

They don't become a country until some other country recognizes them. Just declaring is not enough. Legacypac (talk) 15:22, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

@Legacypac That's not for us as editors to decide what constitutes a country, we must cover all notable points of view. Mainline421 (talk) 15:24, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

We are not deciding "what constitutes a country", we are following the reliable sources. And please don't reopen this request until a consensus has been garnered. The categories suggested are premature.  Paine Ellsworth  ^put'r there  15:29, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

There are several theories of statehood - they might meet start to meet the declarative theory one of these days if they can establish military and police control over their defined teritory but it’s going to be very interesting if any country actually recognizes a new state. Recognition of a new state here will embolden separatist movements in other countries amd not just in Europe like Scotland, but Kurds, areas of Russia and China, Quebec, and other places. I was told today about a politician from Sabah that is working in Catalonia on independence because she sees it as precedent for her state separating. Unless there is a civil war that leads to separation, or an agreement with the Spanish government, we need other states to recognize a new country before we start calling it a country. Legacypac (talk) 21:47, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Category:States and territories established in 2017

I added Category:States and territories established in 2017 using HOTCAT, not realising BrownHairedGirl had locked the article - no notification was given that I was editing a fully protected article. Said edit was not an attempt to use my admin's tools to gain an advantage. If there are any objections to this addition, please ping me and I'll remove the category, or any other admin may remove it without further recourse to myself. Mjroots (talk) 15:28, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Yes, even that category is misleading as to when the Catalan territory was established, isn't it?  Paine Ellsworth  ^put'r there  15:31, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

@Paine Ellsworth: - I was referring to the Declaration of Independence when I added the category. However, I've removed it whilst the issue is discussed. If there is consensus, we can re-add it later. Mjroots (talk) 15:46, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Mjroots, I'm sure your edit was made in good faith. However, in the circumstances you were right to self-revert until a consensus is established. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:49, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Mjroots! Yes, I think that's prudent.  Paine Ellsworth  ^put'r there  15:50, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Discussion

Should the category be added? Mjroots (talk) 15:52, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

• Support as proposer and for reason explained above. Mjroots (talk) 15:53, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Flag

This is not the correct flag to be displayed. The flag is still the senyera, which is the Catalan flag. What appears on this article is the estelada, the independentist flag -that is to say: the pro-independence movement flag. Could you please change it? On the original article the flag appears as it should appear. Thanks. --95.23.151.98 (talk) 15:45, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

I agree that the official flag should be shown. Mjroots (talk) 15:46, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

I disagree - the flag refers to the unrecognised "Republic of Catalonia" established by the unilateral declaration of independence rather than the Autonomous Community of Catalonia, which today ceased to exist (temporarily or otherwise) both from a Spanish and a Catalan perspective. The section detailing the independentist claim should display iconography and legal claims made by the Catalan government rather than Spanish law. The official Catalan flag could be displayed below as part of the de jure section. Maswimelleu (talk) 15:50, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Nobody claims the Estelada as the national flag, it's just a 'fight symbol'. --MrPotato1010 (talk) 15:57, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Exactly, nobody in Catalunya takes this as the national flag, it is only reivindicative. Whether it is an Autonomous region or an independent state the flag is the same.

I agree with MrPotato1010 and Mjroots: the official flag is still the senyera. Nothing has changed yet. So you can use the estelada in an independence section, but not on the infobox because it is not accurate at all. Moreover, we should always base our contributions on official/reliable information, and this is clearly not the case, Maswimelleu. --95.23.151.98 (talk) 16:05, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Furthermore, the Law of juridical transition and foundation of the Republic states:

::Article 10. Continuity of the valid law

1. The local, autonomic and state regulations in force in Catalonia at the time of entry into force of this Law shall continue to apply in all matters not in contravention of this Law and the Catalan law passed subsequently.

Thus, the article of the Autonomy Statute that declares the Senyera as the official flag of Catalonia it's still in force according to the Catalan government. --MrPotato1010 (talk) 16:13, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

References

Protected edit request on 27 October 2017 (5)

Change the word "region" to "republic". Willyke93 (talk) 15:48, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

No. Wikipedia has a neutral point of view. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:49, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

If you have a NPOV, why do you insist on continuing to display the Spanish POV? Fact of the matter is that a independent Republic has been declared.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Willyke93 (talk • contribs)

Please show me a reliable source that a country not in the Iberian Peninsula has recognised Catalonia as an independent country right now. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:05, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

FYI: until it begins to be officially recognized by the international community, Wikipedia must remain neutral and maintain the status quo.  Paine Ellsworth  ^put'r there  16:09, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Lede and independence

I think this sentence " Its constitutional status is the subject of a dispute between Kingdom of Spain which views it as an autonomous community within Spain and the Generalitat de Catalunya which views it as an independent republic following a unilateral declaration of independence from Spain on October 27, 2017." should appear further down. the main part of the lede should be about permanent information on the region. perhaps a single word like "disputed" could be at the top, but despite this being a really big event, its not a permanent fact. their ongoing struggle wtih spain is of course a permanent characteristic of the region. can we get some consensus on how prominent the current events should be in the lede?Mercurywoodrose (talk) 15:52, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Only time will tell the permanence or otherwise, but right now the existence of the dispute is the defining characteristic of Catalonia ... so a terse mention belongs near the top of the lede. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:57, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Flags/Infobox

The Estelada is not considered to represent Catalonia, but rather the secessionist movement in that territory, a 'fight symbol'. The flag of Catalonia is always considered to be the Senyera (secessionists and non-secessionists), and it's the official flag.

Consider using |image_flag in the Geobox/settlement template (wich is deprecated: {{Infobox settlement}} should be used instead.)

Example:

Catalonia
Flag

--MrPotato1010 (talk) 15:55, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

References

Protected edit request on 27 October 2017 (6)

Please immediately remove the mention of Catalonia as a independent republic. This is not true and has not been accepted by any country in the world. BoBoLoG (talk) 16:16, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

 Not done Discuss, get consensus, then submit the request. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:56, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 27 October 2017 (7)

79.157.133.162 (talk) 16:22, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Catalonia is a country

 Not done no request. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:45, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 27 October 2017 (9)

Explain that the declaration of independence is legitimized with the catalan referendum of independence held on October 1. Rollerman (talk) 16:41, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

• That is a matter of opinion, so no. Drmies (talk) 16:47, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 27 October 2017 (10)

To change the word "feudatory", which is not grammatical, to "feudal" in the introductory paragraph to this article. Lottamiata (talk) 16:44, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

• I wouldn't say "not grammatical" but sure. Drmies (talk) 16:47, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

According to Google, owing feudal allegiance to. "they had for a long period been feudatory to the Norwegian Crown" --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:48, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

• Very interesting, SarekOfVulcan. The word "feudatory" was actually new to me. That citation of yours appears in the OED as well (adjective used predicatively), but it cites attribute usage too: "The armies kept up by the feudatory states". Moreover, it is a noun as well--"One who holds his lands by feudal tenure; a feudal vassal". I'd argue that "feudatory vassal", while not ungrammatical, is somewhat redundant (a vassal always being in a feudal relationship to a lord or monarch or whatever), but it is no more redundant than "feudal vassal". If you want to revert my change, by all means. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 16:57, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

  I don't see any need to revert, if you're happy with the wording as it stands. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:59, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 27 October 2017 (11)

In the last introductory paragraph, before the line that states that the Parliament of Catalonia declared independence on October 27, 2017, that "On October 1, 2017, a referendum was held in Catalonia in which a very large majority of Catalonian's voted for independence despite efforts by the Spanish government to suppress the vote." Lottamiata (talk) 16:53, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

 Not done Get consensus for the wording first, then submit it. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:55, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 27 October 2017 (12)

When I re-wrote the opening sentence, I described Catalonia as a "region" to avoid taking sides in the status dispute. I then explained the rival claims to the area between Spain and the unilaterally declared Catalan Republic. I believe that the word "region" may be viewed by many as not being neutral by some people as it might imply "autonomous region" and therefore propose that the word "region" be changed to "disputed area" or "disputed territory".Cordyceps-Zombie (talk) 17:47, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

 Not done Seems like a reasonable change, but it will need consensus before making an edit request. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:49, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Also sounds reasonable to use area or territory. You may be able to take out the word "disputed" too; the geographical space occupied by Catalonia itself (either an independent country or an autonomous region of Spain) is not disputed, only its political status (at least as far as I have read and seen). MarkJerue (talk) 18:13, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 27 October 2017 (13)

Change "Republic of Catalonia" in the infobox to "Catalan Republic" Cipika (talk) 18:08, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

 Not done No source given for name. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:12, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Umm, the text of the declaration of independence clearly mentions "República catalana", which in English is translated as "Catalan Republic". The "Republic of Catalonia" would be "República de Catalunya" in Catalan. (https://www.ara.cat/2017/10/10/Declaracio_Independencia_amb_logo_-1.pdf). Secondly, there's already a Wikipedia page presenting the political entity which uses that version. Cipika (talk) 19:23, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm still hesitant to make that change, until we have a reasonably reliable source (UN? US State Department?) giving the translation.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:32, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 27 October 2017 (14)

PanthWiki (talk) 18:17, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Hotlinking "independent republic" in the first paragraph to Republic of Catalonia

 Not done Consensus needed for changes of this nature. Discuss, get consensus, and request again.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:18, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Flag (again)

I'm seeing more than enough consensus to use file:Flag of Catalonia.svg, so I've restored it to the infobox. Mjroots (talk) 18:58, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Well done. This is the only accepted catalan flag (by all parties). Previous flag (including white star on blue triangle) is a symbol used by independence supporters, but is never meant to replace the actual flag. 83.38.236.59 (talk) 19:47, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 27 October 2017 (16)

Amend description under map in info box to something along the lines of "Location of Catalonia relative to Spain", so as to take a more neutral point of view given independence dispute. Cheers, Burwellian (Talk) 19:25, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

 Not done Until they're recognized as an independent country, that's not appropriate. We can't move ahead of the reliable sources. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:27, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Compromise - label it "location of Catalonia" with Spain in one colour, Catalonia in another, and the rest of Europe in a grey tone. Emphasise that Catalonia is a disputed territory. Could say "location of Catalonia in Europe" but imo since the map wouldn't show all of Europe that would be inappropriate, unless the scope of the map in increased. Map needs to show both that Catalonia has some measure of relationship to Spain but doesn't need to present it on a map with all the other Spanish regions to sustain neutral point of view. Maswimelleu (talk) 19:43, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Kinda what I'm getting at, yeah. Should prob not be "in" Spain as it sides against Catalans, but can't exclude Spain as that'd side against Spanish POV. Need a way of stating that both are being shown but that status of Catalonia relative to Spain is disputed. - Cheers, Burwellian (Talk) 20:04, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

I suppose we could go with "Location of Catalonia", and let the map speak for itself... --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 20:08, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Catalan Republic (2017) move

Requesting most of the main history of Catalonia and demographics moved to Catalan Republic (2017), history of autonomy should be covered only under Spain here. AHC300 (talk) 19:29, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Shouldn't be done until we know what the status going forward is going to be. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:56, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Status according to who? Madrid? AHC300 (talk) 20:02, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

The UN? The US State Department? Anybody besides us? --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 20:08, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Oppose - the article is called "Catalonia" which refers to the region's entire history and not to a specific method of government. The autonomy of the Catalan government has been suspended and hence the infobox and opening text should be discussing the region as a geographical area rather than a political unit. Maswimelleu (talk) 19:57, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

False info, as there is no constitutional dispute. Catalonia is a region of Spain

This is FALSE: "Its constitutional status is the subject of a dispute between the Kingdom of Spain, which views it as an autonomous community within Spain, and the Generalitat de Catalunya, which views it as an independent republic following a unilateral declaration of independence from Spain on October 27, 2017.[4]".

Catalonia is a region of Spain. Nowadays there is political unrest, as some regional politicians (regional government and regional parliament) had a theater of declaring the independence. The constitution does not allows it, and all the power is the Spanish central institutions. Sirivap (talk) 19:51, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Oppose - Wikipedia maintains a neutral point of view and cannot side with the Spanish government simply because their case is backed up by constitutional law or the majority of other sovereign states. The Catalan government has declared independence and this is significant enough to describe the status of Catalonia as being in dispute. Maswimelleu (talk) 19:54, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

 Not done Feel free to discuss this here, come to a WP:Consensus-based conclusion about the wording that should be used, and re-request the edit at that time. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:55, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

I agree. There is no "declaration of independence", unilateral or any other kind - false statement and should be removed. Catalonian parliament voted for declaration of independence, but not declared it, at least, not yet. And of course there is no sign of any kind of "dispute" mentioned.--SubRE (talk) 21:17, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

The Catalan Parliament declared independence today, immediately following the vote. This is referenced in the article and is not a false statement. The opening line immediately describes Catalonia as disputed territory, which is correct. If you would like to suggest ways in which the "dispute" can be more clearly represented then this would be a helpful way to improve this article's coverage of the ongoing crisis regarding the unilateral independence declaration. Maswimelleu (talk) 21:31, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

No, this is not mentioned in the article, you are wrong.--SubRE (talk) 21:46, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Oppose. It is a country now. Reaper7 (talk) 22:59, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Does everyone agree that it belongs on the List of unrecognized states? Rightly or wrongly (not for Wikipedia or Wikipedians to determine) the regional parliament has unquestionably declared independence. Whether they have that right or whether it is the correct course of action is not the issue. It has a legislative body that has declared it to be an independent, sovereign state. That is a fact. As of this writing, it has also not been recognized by any other such entity (state) or putative entity (partially- or unrecognized state), also a cold, hard fact as of about midnight on 28 October 2017. So, does it belong on that list, or does this need to wait, and if so, how long? 2600:1004:B116:2BB8:9CA1:2790:AC91:7017 (talk) 23:36, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

You should ask: does anyone agree, better. The regional parliament has unquestionably not declared independence (at least not by this moment) of such a state.--SubRE (talk) 11:16, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

I would propose following wording:

Catalonia (Catalan: Catalunya, Occitan: Catalonha, Spanish: Cataluña) is a region in the northeastern extremity of the Iberian Peninsula. It is also northeastern extremity of Spain since year 1xxx, although emerged a crisis of ″independence″ in 2017. Its constitutional and agreed status is the subject of a disagreement between both the Kingdom of Spain and the rule of law on one hand, which recognize it as an autonomous community within Spain, and half of the the Generalitat de Catalunya, which argue for an independent republic following a unilateral declaration of independence from Spain on October 27, 2017.

Under the rule of law, and based on the Spanish constitution, it is an autonomous community with the designation of a nationality by its Statute of Autonomy.

Mostly agree The English page is the only one, among all the major languages, to display the administrative status in such a confusing manner. I checked the French, German, Chinese, Russian, and Italian pages for Catalonia and they all list Catalonia as a Spanish region but mention the declaration and suspension in one of the introductory paragraphs. The gold medal, I think, goes to the German page. It's straightforward and simple. Bear in mind that the declaration of independence was made following an illegal referendum with less than 43% of participation and approved in a parliamentary session vote in which 1/3 of the MPs were missing and another 10% of MPs who stayed, voted no. There is not just an absolute lack of international recognition, but the exact opposite is the truth; all foreign governments gave their support to the Spanish government.Baidelan (talk) 05:21, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

It looks like in your list of all the major languages — French, German, Chinese, Russian, and Italian — you forgot the Catalan one, which might be not so irrelevant. So, here it is, with its improved translation to English (but I assume an add-hoc link to a relevant article could be short enough; for instance catalonian crisis 2017 could be created, in order to merge altogether the illegal referendum, the illegal declaration of independence, and related topics).

Catalan page

translation to English, and improved

Catalan original

Catalunya (Cataluña en castellà, Catalonha en occità) is an european territory localized in the western part of the Mediteranean sea. Its political status is the object of claims between Parlament de Catalunya, which on 27 octobre 2017 would declare República Catalana, ant the Kingdom of Spain, in which it benefits from the comunitat autònoma status. It is in the nord-east of the Ibèric peninsul and limited at nord with both Andorra and France, at west with Aragon/Spain, at south with País Valencià and at east with Mediterranean sea. Catalonia is the larger part of a wider històric & cultural territory which would include Principat de Catalunya and the neighboring territories of Catalan speaking known as Països Catalans. With an estimated 7.508.106 inhabitants in 2015, it makes 51,55% of the total population in Països Catalans.

Catalunya (Cataluña en castellà, Catalonha en occità) és un país europeu situat a la Mediterrània occidental. La seva condició jurídica és objecte d'una disputa entre el Parlament de Catalunya, que el 27 d'octubre de 2017 va proclamar la República Catalana, i el Regne d'Espanya, que el considera una comunitat autònoma. És situat a la costa nord-est de la península Ibèrica i limita al nord amb Andorra i França, a l'oest amb Espanya o Aragó, al sud amb el País Valencià i a l'est amb el mar Mediterrani. Catalunya és la part més extensa del territori històric i cultural del Principat de Catalunya i de tot el conjunt de terres de parla catalana o els Països Catalans. Amb un estimat de 7.508.106 d'habitants del 2015, agrupa el 51,55% de la població total dels Països Catalans.

Agree

The Catalan Wiki is not a reliable source. It is long-known to be strongly biased towards independentism's propaganda. We should analyze the situation with less feelings and with more logic.

The Republic was proclaimed, and no one has recognized it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalan_Republic_(2017)#International_recognition

So, Catalonia, so far no support has been showed yet, must be listed as a region of Spain. A fair solution would be to list the 'country' in the 'unrecognized states' list. Accordingly, the predominant status of Catalonia should be a 'region' followed by the self-proclaimed republic, not the opposite.

References

Community Sanctions

A proposal has been made to impose community sanctions including possible editing restrictions, on the topic of Catalan independence. Interested editors may join the discussion here. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:30, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 27 October 2017 (18) - Remove vandalism

I wanted to edit the page but I see it's fully protected, not only semi-protected.

I suggest to undone those 2 vandalism edits which just made a mess up and endirtened the page. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&diff=807369754&oldid=807369526 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&diff=807369877&oldid=807369754

Both editions deleted lots of the infobox with no reason or sense. The 1st user is even blocked now for this vandalizing, although his changes were not undone. Neither this 2nd edition from above, another one which just deleted lots of information without sense. --TechnicianGB (talk) 00:41, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

•  Not done. That is certainly not vandalism. See the deffinition of vandalism here: WP:VANDALISM. Vanjagenije (talk) 14:20, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 28 October 2017 (1)

Please, can you talk with the admin of the Catalan page of "Catalonia" to inmediately change the terms "Pais" for "Comunidad Autonoma" or another more neutral term?. It's not good to write this type of terms because now this term of WIKIPEDIA is in dispute and for WIKIPEDIA is a bad example of no neutrality. Now we can see this in this page: "Aquest article és sobre L'ESTAT. Pel territori històric i polític vegeu Principat de Catalunya, i per altres definicions Catalunya (desambiguació)." Chisco2 (talk) 10:23, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

 Not done There is nothing we here can do about other language versions of Wikipedia. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 10:42, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

request correction/improvement

this sentence "The defeat of the Second Spanish Republic in the Spanish Civil War brought fascist Francisco Franco to power"

should be changed to

Hitler and Mussolini's intervention in the Spanish Civil War allowed clerico-fascist Francisco Franco to defeat the Second Spanish Republic and usurp power, "

"clerico-fascist" is the term used by richard evans and most other main-stream anglo-saxon historians.

the republic was not defeated by miracle but rather by the luftwaffe and the wehrmacht's panzers.

•  Not done. The article does not say the Republic was defeated by miracle. It says the Republic was defeated. That is a neutral statement of facts. Vanjagenije (talk) 14:18, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Unilateral...

Again, is the term necessary? We get it a lot with Kosovo but I don't see why. It is always a body representing the "breakaway" region that declares independence. Nobody can do it for them, and nobody can do it "with" them (bilateral, multilateral). --Vrhunski (talk) 10:33, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

For example, in Montenegro the independence process had the approval of Serbia. Also, had Scotland voted yes on independence in 2014, the process would not have been unilateral, as the UK government had approved the referendum. --Jaakko Sivonen (talk) 10:59, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request

An important fact is being ignored in the article: the Spanish Government on Friday dismissed Catalonia's president Carles Puigdemont and his cabinet (source: CNN )

It means Carles Puigdemont is no longer the official Catalonia's president, as it's being wrongly stated in the article's infobox. BBC News is already referring to him as "Catalan ex-leader". . Also in Reuters, "ousted Catalan leader":

So could you administrators please update the article accordingly? The infobox should be updated, and information about the dismissal of the president and cabinet should be cited in the end of the "Independence movement (2014–present)" section. Mad Tarjan (talk) 20:39, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

He's listed as president of the Catalan Republic, which many currently consider to be an independent country separate from Spain. The status of Catalonia is currently under dispute, and personally I'm surprised at the angle the BBC is currently taking. It's clear you consider the Catalan Republic not to exist, but it is backed up by reliable sources. If you want to dispute this any further it's probably best to bring this up on Talk:Catalan_Republic_(2017). Mainline421 (talk) 21:03, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

My opinions or points of view are completely irrelevant in this matter, and I haven't even expressed them, so please don't come to conclusions about what I consider or not. Wikipedia is neither a primary source nor a place for unbacked "many currently consider" affirmations, that's why I'm backing my affirmation with NPOV relevant sources: BBC, CNN, Reuters. Carles Puigdemont was sacked by the Spanish Government as the president of the Generalitat, it is a fact, as it is clearly stated in CNN's article and many other relevant and unbiased news sources like The Guardian , France24 and Deutsche Welle . This fact is also stated in the Wikipedia article President of the Generalitat of Catalonia. So, the Catalonia article clearly needs to present this information.Mad Tarjan (talk) 21:30, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

•  Not done. Please, reach consensus for this proposed edit before making an edit request. WP:RfC could be useful here. Vanjagenije (talk) 21:33, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

References

Thing is, this page is about Catalonia, not about the Catalan Republic, that has its own page, as pointed out by Mainline421. So, if this page is about Catalonia, it should clearly reflect the most recent facts regarding it, specially in this moments of political turmoil. I've added links to six articles from some of the most globally reliable news sources stating that the Spanish Government has sacked the president and dissolved the parliament of Catalonia. In its current form, the "Independence Movement" section of the article is correctly stating: "On 27 October 2017, the Catalan parliament voted to declare independence. On the same day, the Senate of Spain voted to institute direct rule, via Article 155 of the Spanish Constitution". Nevertheless, to be complete, it must add the information about the sacking of the president and dissolution of the parliament (as seen in the sources I've added), a direct consequences of the Senate vote to institute direct rule. Mad Tarjan (talk) 21:52, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Puigdemont has been effectively removed from all power. If somebody considers him a leader, makes little difference. The effective control is his. If someone similarly said they do not consider someone as their leader, it makes no difference. The Spanish government has control of Catalonia. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 22:53, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

No Catalan Republic exists, delete the republic infobox section

I pasted a similar comment on Talk:Catalan Republic (2017). Similar to that, I wonder here why the infobox section was created. Reasons behind this are the same - The state in question didn't even exist because of absence of territorial control. Based on what I've read there was only an "independent declaration". It doesn't seem Madrid lost full control over the region even if it's autonomous. Despite independence there was no real "independence". The Catalan government and parliament was removed from power immediately after the declaration. I think the section shouldn't exist. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 22:47, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Agree Infobox gives undue credit to the Catalan Republic (CR):

Lack of popular support - declaration of independence was made following an illegal referendum with <43% participation, approved in parliamentary session with 1/3 of MPs missing and another 10% voting no. Pop support for CR seems 50% at best.

Lack of international recognition - as of now, 59 foreign governments gave their support to Spain and not a single one to CR.

Better remove reference to CR in infobox, for now, but keep mention to current dispute in the introductory paragraphs with a link to the CR page.Baidelan (talk) 23:14, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

• @2017NewYearNewMe, Ethanmayersweet, and SarekOfVulcan: In a series of edits, the infobox description was changed from "Autonomous community" to "Disputed Territory". Where exactly was a consensus reached for such change? Vanjagenije (talk) 23:16, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

This is vandalism by the administrators of the page. Should be escalated to the higher instances of Wikipedia. There is no Catalan Republic as such. Besides all the sources already pointed out, there are several facts why Catalonia is still Spain: -They are still part of EU -The major of Catalan Police accepted his destitution -Catalan football teams will play in Spanish Liga -The police is not providing escort nor protection to the now ex-ministers of Catalonia. Etc This is a farce and as such Wikipedia should not accept it. Zbiegniew 1980 (talk) 11:13, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

What happended to all the information in the infobox?

I don't mind what infobox is used, but I don't understand why all the information is gone? Most of it is relevant to Catalonia, whether part of Spain or separate. This information should be readded, or the old infobox should be restored until someone can be bothered to transfer all the information over into this new infobox. I'm not familiar with this new one. The old infobox was just an {{Infobox Settlement}}, other disputed territories use this infobox such as Sevastopol. It was basically identical to an {{Infobox country}}... whereas the new one has hardly any information in it, it's a joke. How is this an improvement to anyone? Rob984 (talk) 01:45, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Agree Current infobox is uninformative and confusing. Moreover, de facto administration doesn't belong to Catalan Republic. If anything, de facto admon is contested with Spain, as Spanish gov already started to exert direct control (read CNN article referenced above).Baidelan (talk) 06:50, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 29 October 2017

I wrote the lead paragraph prior to the page becoming protected. At the time of writing a page for the Catalan Republic did not exist so i placed a link to the "Generalitat de Catalunya" page as one party to the dispute over constitutional status. A page has now been created for the unilaterally declared Catalan Republic so a direct link can now be made to that article rather than the article about the Generalitat.

I therefore propose the following changes to wording in the lead paragraph (changes shown in bold):

"Catalonia (Catalan: Catalunya, Occitan: Catalonha, Spanish: Cataluña) is a region in the northeastern extremity of the Iberian Peninsula. Its constitutional status is the subject of a dispute between the Kingdom of Spain, which views it as an autonomous community within Spain, and the Catalan Republic, which views it as an independent state following a unilateral declaration of independence from Spain on 27 October 2017." Cordyceps-Zombie (talk) 11:10, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

The above sentence is wrong, because there is cno dispute on constitutional status. This is absolutely false in legal terms. There may have occurred a symbolic declaration of independence, but there is no constitutional dispute, because in Spanish and EU legal terms it is clear they are not a country and the constitution says what it says. A different thing is that the Generalitat declared independence. Drafting should be:

"Its political status is the subject of a dispute..." Zbiegniew 1980 (talk) 11:30, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Agree It's a political dispute. And please revert infobox to original template.Baidelan (talk) 13:44, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

I can live with the word political instead of constitutional if there is a greater consensus for use of that word. Cordyceps-Zombie (talk) 14:00, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

"Catalonia (Catalan: Catalunya, Occitan: Catalonha, Spanish: Cataluña) is a region in the northeastern extremity of the Iberian Peninsula. Its political status is the subject of a dispute between the Kingdom of Spain, which views it as an autonomous community within Spain, and the Catalan Republic, which views it as an independent state following a unilateral declaration of independence from Spain on 27 October 2017." Cordyceps-Zombie (talk) 11:10, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

 Not done. You obviously do not have consensus for this edit. Please, establish consensus before making an edit request. Vanjagenije (talk) 14:06, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

• @Vanjagenije: please explain why you feel that there is not enough consensus so we can address it. You just had three different people agree to the change without any opposition.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Baidelan (talk • contribs) 14:26, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

WP:PING does not work unless you sing your post. Less than three hours have passed between the original request and my comment. Consensus needs time to form. Not all editors are here 24/7. When the consensus is clear, then an edit request should be made. In this case, an edit request was made before anyone was able to comment. Vanjagenije (talk) 14:36, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Change Introductory Paragraph

Based on the international opinion and that there is another page for the Catalan Republic, I suggest changing the first two introductory paragraph to:

"Catalonia (Catalan: Catalunya, Occitan: Catalonha, Spanish: Cataluña) is a region of Spain in the northeast of the Iberian Peninsula between the Mediterranean coast and the Pyrenees. Politically, Catalonia is considered by the Kingdom of Spain and the international community as one of 17 autonomous communities of Spain and has the designation of a Historic Nationality (Spanish nacionalidad histórica) by its Statute of Autonomy. However, the regional Catalan parliament views it as an independent state following a unilateral declaration of independence on 27 October 2017.

Catalonia consists of four provinces: Barcelona, Girona, Lleida, and Tarragona. The capital and largest city is Barcelona, the second-most populated municipality in Spain and the core of the seventh most populous urban area in the European Union. Catalonia comprises most of the territory of the former Principality of Catalonia (with the remainder Roussillon now part of France's Pyrénées-Orientales). It is bordered by France and Andorra to the north, the Mediterranean Sea to the east, and the Spanish autonomous communities of Aragon to the west and Valencia to the south. The official languages are Catalan, Spanish, and the Aranese dialect of Occitan."

In the late 8th century..."

Let me know what you think.Baidelan (talk) 15:45, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

• I turned this into a WP:RfC as the same request was made several times. Vanjagenije (talk) 15:51, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Based on community feedback I redrafted the text as follows:

"Catalonia (Catalan: Catalunya, Occitan: Catalonha, Spanish: Cataluña) is an autonomous community of Spain in the northeast of the Iberian Peninsula between the Mediterranean coast and the Pyrenees. Its constitutional status is the subject of a dispute between the Spanish State, backed by the international community, which views it as an autonomous community within Spain, and the former government of Catalonia which views it as an independent republic following a unilateral declaration of independence on 27 October 2017.

Catalonia is compromised of four provinces: Barcelona, Girona, Lleida, and Tarragona. The capital and largest city is Barcelona, the second-most populated municipality in Spain and the core of the seventh most populous urban area in the European Union. Catalonia comprises most of the territory of the former Principality of Catalonia (with the remainder Roussillon now part of France's Pyrénées-Orientales). It is bordered by France and Andorra to the north, the Mediterranean Sea to the east, and the Spanish autonomous communities of Aragon to the west and Valencia to the south. The official languages are Catalan, Spanish, and the Aranese dialect of Occitan.

In the late 8th century..."

Let me know what you thinkBaidelan (talk) 03:41, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Survey

• Oppose, Support redacted version, see discussion below. Coldcreation (talk) 16:15, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

@Vanjagenije: I think there is consensus for this change, at least in the first paragraph. Could you implement it? Baidelan (talk) 18:22, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Threaded discussion

The article currently reads:

"[...] Its constitutional status is the subject of a dispute between the Kingdom of Spain, which views it as an autonomous community within Spain, and the Generalitat de Catalunya, which views it as an independent republic following a unilateral declaration of independence from Spain on 27 October 2017."

Here is the way I think it should read (see difference in bold):

[...] Its constitutional status is the subject of a dispute between the Spanish State, which views it as an autonomous community within Spain, and the former government of Catalonia.

Calling Spain the "Kingdom of Spain" is not precise. The Spanish Constitution does not establish any official name for Spain, even though the terms España (Spain), Estado español (Spanish State) and Nación española (Spanish Nation) are used. The Spanish Ministry of Foreign Affairs established in an ordinance published in 1984 that the denominations España (Spain) and Reino de España (Kingdom of Spain) are equally valid to designate Spain in international treaties (see here). Here we are not discussing an international treaty. Hence the word Kingdom is inaccurate in this context. Furthermore, the Generalitat de Catalunya is currently under the control of the Spanish government, i.e., Catalonia is not viewed as an independent republic. The unilateral declaration of independence from Spain on 27 October 2017 was never accepted by the Spanish State, and so should be removed; only the former heads of the Catalan government recognized independence. Coldcreation (talk) 16:15, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

I agree to using the name Spanish State. Note that in my suggested edit, I avoided mentioning the nature of the dispute as a way to circumvent it. But if we must include it, I think it should be "[...] Its political status is the subject of" rather than constitutional? Your comments seem to support this view.Baidelan (talk) 18:17, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

It is interesting to note that the word "state" has a very different connotation to an American nowadays; nowadays it means for Americans one of the official provinces of the USA. But that name is not important to me. Yet if a nation has a King, does that not make it a Kingdom? (PeacePeace (talk) 20:43, 29 October 2017 (UTC))

State is appropriate here. As far as "constitutional": The problem was that the Spanish constitution did not allow Catalonia to vote for independence, according to the Spanish supreme court. The deposed heads of Catalonia disputed that ruling, and went ahead with the vote anyway. Therefore, it was a constitutional crisis, and the vote was deemed illegal (anti-constitutional) by the Spanish government. Coldcreation (talk) 20:53, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

I am thinking that probably the English words like state and province should be eliminated and the Spanish words be used for accuracy. (PeacePeace (talk) 20:58, 29 October 2017 (UTC))

State does not refer exclusively to your definition. See here. Coldcreation (talk) 22:32, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Both Kingdom and state are fine with me. I also agree that it is a constitutional dispute with the former government of Catalonia. Please refer to the new text I drafted above and let me know your thoughts.Baidelan (talk) 03:41, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

I can support this new version. Coldcreation (talk) 05:45, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

The Unqualified Present Tense Should Be Avoided in Articles

If an editor writes in present tense, "The biggest dog in Great Britain is a Great Dane", what the editor wrote in present tense becomes past & possible false very quickly. The next day, a bigger dog may be found who is a different variety; then the statement becomes false. It is better to write, "The biggest dog in Great Britain was a Great Dane, as of October 29, 2017."

This article describing Catalonia contains " . . . , which views it as an autonomous community within Spain, . . ." But as of this weekend, it appears that this statement has become false. It is easy to find reliable courses stating that Spain has now abolished the autonomy of Catalonia, making it no longer autonomous, and certainly not now viewing it as autonomous.

CNN "http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/29/europe/catalonia-independence-spain/index.html": Autonomy Stripped. I think you can find a multitude of "reliable sources" for this statement.

I suppose that the term "autonomous" might be justified by the language used in Spanish constitutional/legal documents, but if the article were to be accurate, IMHO it would have to rate how autonomous it was, since it is obvious that it was not purely autonomous; like on a scale of 1-10, how autonomous was it? At any rate, do we all agree that the statement saying that the Kingdom of Spain views Catalonia as autonomous should be changed to the past tense? (PeacePeace (talk) 20:37, 29 October 2017 (UTC))

However, autonomy has not been canceled. Instead it has been partially suspended. Therefore the territory itself remains autonomous, just that autonomy has been temporarily reduced. FOARP (talk) 10:20, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 29 October 2017

In the second line of the introduction, please add a link to the Catalan Republic (2017) article in "(..)which views it as an independent republic following (..)". Thank you.   Amr  21:47, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Done no opposition to request — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:28, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

"de facto" in infobox

In the Spain section of the infobox, should we add "and de facto" inside the parentheses that comes after Spain? Doing so would clarify the status of the region according to what is true. VarunSoon (talk) 08:53, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Not sure that either "de jure" or "de facto" actually clarify anything. Obviously if Catalonia is both de jure and de facto part of Spain there is no need to say both as there would be no way in which it is not part of Spain. Saying that Catalonia is de jure part of Spain implies that, de facto, it is not, but there is no source supporting this statement and everything appears to indicate that Spanish rule still has effect in Catalonia (i.e., Spain controls the territory). Additionally, de jure means "in law", but whose law are we talking about? Since the Catalan nationalists do not acknowledge Spanish law they obviously do not regard Catalonia as being de jure part of Spain so to say so it to adopt the Spanish POV. tl;dr - we should just say that Catalonia is part of Spain until there is a clear indication that this has changed. A mere declaration of independence does not do this as it does not, by itself, establish an independent state - instead people need to act on the declaration. FOARP (talk) 10:16, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 30 October 2017

After the sentence "On the same day, the Senate of Spain voted to institute direct rule, via Article 155 of the Spanish Constitution.", the following sentence should be added -- According to the United Nations Charter the actions of Spain in this regard are illegal. The right of people to self-determination is a cardinal principle in modern international law (commonly regarded as a jus cogens rule), binding, as such, on the United Nations as authoritative interpretation of the Charter's norms. It states that a people, based on respect for the principle of equal rights and fair equality of opportunity, have the right to freely choose their sovereignty and international political status with no interference. Hmortar (talk) 13:39, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Do you have a reliable source that says that the United Nations has declared as such with regards to this situation? Absent a reliable source, Wikipedia editors have no business trying to interpret what is or is not illegal per the UN Charter. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 13:47, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Hmortar your interpretation is incorrect. The actions of Spain are perfectly legal. The UN (as the EU) has stayed out of this internal (to Spain) conflict. Coldcreation (talk) 13:49, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

 Not done Discuss, get consensus, then request the change. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:24, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Restore normality on the article

If we consider that today it has been confirmed that the two main independentistas political parties are going to participate in the regional elections of 2017, we can affirm that they are accepting that there is no Republic and that they accept the Spanish legality, reason why I suggest that we put back the article as it was before. (https://elpais.com/ccaa/2017/10/30/catalunya/1509358290_230800.html, Spanish)

TheRichic (talk) 13:56, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

We cannot ignore the historic fact(in the history section) and as long as the Catalan parliament does not publicly agree to abide by Spanish law, the affirmation above is original research. They may also be hedging their bets: i.e. claiming it is independent AND participating in elections to ensure representation if they later give the field. Also original research, but just here to show the "affirmation" is less clear cut than suggested. Arnoutf (talk) 14:16, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

The article should be restored to how it was before all of this happened as the part of the Catalan parliament along with Puigdemont has fled to Brussels. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:18, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Support Government is no more and never achieved any international recognition. No de jure and no de facto make for a weak claim. Baidelan (talk) 16:44, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Does the former Catalonian government agee it is no more? If not, there is still a dispute, unless there are reliable sources that claim the situation in Catalonia is indeed restored to normality. Arnoutf (talk) 17:50, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Situation so far is: lack of international recognition and lack of effective home rule. Nothing about the Catalan Republic resembles a government: parties agreed to concur in new local elections organized by Spain and key figureheads fled to other countries.Baidelan (talk) 18:10, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Which is why the article in its current state does not mention that. So what should be changed back to normal exactly??? Arnoutf (talk) 18:14, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Good question. We may have reached consensus on a rewording for the introductory paragraph. Take a look in one of the preceding topics on this talk page. The other change needed is the infobox, which currently is confusing and uninformative. For the infobox, I would just restore it to the version before Oct 27. Baidelan (talk) 18:33, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

And, the concept of catalan republic does not exist, and is not official within Catalonia: according to people working in Catalonia, «Au journal officiel de la Catalogne, "il n'y a rien sur la république"» which means that «in the Government gazette (or official gazette or official journal) of Catalonia, there is nothing about the republic». It is very obvious: not official means not existing. There is no legal ground for such a thing as of today.

Proposed restoration

I propose that the infobox be reverted to how it appeared on (02:13, 24 October 2017) [3]. The info-box just needs updating. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:26, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Link to "direct rule"

Direct rule has become a disambiguation page (and was formerly about Northern Ireland). Please replace the wikilink to that page by a link to direct rule over Catalonia. Certes (talk) 16:22, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

•  Done. Vanjagenije (talk) 16:37, 30 October 2017 (UTC)