Jump to content

Talk:Carles Puigdemont

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Asqueladd (talk | contribs) at 05:29, 12 March 2019. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article


Exile?

Why exile? He did not go into exile, he is a fugitive who fled Spain to escaped prosecution because of his (alleged) offenses. Is Edward Snowden in Russia because he is a fugitive or he is self-exiled?Karljoos (talk) 19:52, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can we find reliable sources to back this claim, in Spanish will do (fugitivo) or Catalan. If we can find such sources we should include this though not necessarily replacing, merely stating both. ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 21:35, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think we can. 1. BBC News: Catalonia Spain: Fugitive Puigdemont abandons presidency [1] 2. The Independent: Carles Puigdemont: Fugitive former Catalan president arrested in Germany [2] 3.France 24: Fugitive Puigdemont abandons bid to return as Catalan leader [3] 4. NBC News: Fugitive ex-Catalan leader Carles Puigdemont held by police in Germany [4] 5. CBC: Thousands protest as fugitive ex-Catalan president arrested in Germany[5] 6. NY Times: Spain Tries to Foil Re-election of Catalonia’s Fugitive Separatist Leader [6] 7. Irish Times quote: Fugitive former Catalan leader Carles Puigdemont has made a renewed call for Spanish authorities to open negotiations over Catalonia’s secession claim, a day after he was released from a German prison. [7] 8.Aljazeera.[8]. So, fleeing a country to avoid prosecution... when it is from democratic countries like Spain (please see Democracy Index - Spain is ranked ahead of the USA and France) it is not exile. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karljoos (talk • contribs) 17:01, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We can open this dispute time and again, and continue litigation for ever. This was discussed here 5 months ago. However, the final consensus has been altered recently. And now back again, to alter it further, over the same topic, just at the moment when some are on a campaign over this topic off the WP. Just please give it a rest. Iñaki LL (talk) 22:24, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The point of the discussion is different. I am suggesting that the word 'exile' is not used in the article since it does not convey the reasons for Puigdemont's residence change. This was not brought up 5 months ago.-Karljoos (talk)
The discussion was comprehensive enough, and yes, it is basically the same point, the word exile, although in the case you are bringing up refers to not even using it, so we can go on and on again. Note that it has been changed in a short period from "exile" to "forced to exile", and "self-exile" by now. Iñaki LL (talk) 10:08, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed

The reasoning behind editors being seemingly keen on including a rather disposable/inane element telling little to none about the subject (a mere ordinal to the service of Hobsbawm 's invented tradition) which is actually disputed by sources, evades me. The tacit question cames to me as rather obvious: can't any of you live without that friggin' ordinal in the infobox/the lede (either of them)?--Asqueladd (talk) 18:39, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your frustration but even if we get rid of the ordinal number some editors will find other excuses to cause disruption. They are maliciously targetting this article because they disagree with Puigdemont's politics. They are not here to create encyclopedic content. The only way to prevent this is to protect, or at least semi-protect, the article indefinitely.--Obi2canibe (talk) 20:06, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The Catalan presidents enumeration has been used for a long time by the historiography, since it's a very useful way to understand to evolution of the Generalitat. It has also been widely used by all the international and Spanish media, like the most important Spanish newspaper, which is El País: The socialist José Montilla Aguilera has become this afternoon the new president of the Generalitat of Catalonia, the number 128 (November 2006), or the Spain's state-owned public corporation: Quim Torra has promised his position as 131th Catalan president "with fidelity to the people of Catalonia", from the Saló Verge de Montserrat of the Palau de la Generalitat (May 2018). The enumeration is also an official title of the presidents, as seen in the official Catalan Government website: Presidents of the Generalitat, which is why it's used by both the Spanish and Catalan governments, and also the foreign ones. Nobody has ever complained about it.
But, as @Obi2canibe: correctly pointed, as soon as Carles Puigdemont started going serious about the Catalan independence push, a very small group of people argued that he shouldn't be called the "130th" president. Which doesn't make any sense. Then again, when socialist José Montilla was appointed 128th Catalan president in 2006, more than a decade ago, nobody complained. We can look for instance at the ABC's news piece of that time, which is a Spanish newspaper from Madrid who's political alignment is described as "conservatism, Spanish nationalist, monarchist and right wing" according to this very Wikipedia: In this way, the first secretary of the PSC, born in Iznájar (Córdoba) 51 years ago, has become the 128th Catalan president, a position he will definitely take possession of next Tuesday, after his appointment is communicated to the King by the president of the Parliament. Carles Puigdemont is as much as a president as the previous ones. This is an encyclopedia, not an opinion blog. There's no point in discussing this. --193.153.77.68 (talk) 17:25, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Do not remove the templates, is not a good practice in Wikipedia. Yes it is a disputed topic. This discussion itself is a proof.
More references:
¿130 o 9 presidentes?
La “mentira” de los 131 presidentes de la Generalitat
La gran mentira histórica de los 131 presidentes de la Generalitat, el nuevo mantra del nacionalismo catalán
The Puigdemont factor
Note that I am respecting the figure of 130h anyway. --BallenaBlanca 🐳 ♂ (Talk) 17:06, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Carles Puigdemont being the 130th president is not a disputed topic. All of the articles that you have shared are opinion pieces where the authors express different opinions. And the last one of your articles says that Puigdemont is "the ninth president since 1931", which is true, but the article is not saying that he isn't the 130th president. The fact that all of your opinion articles were written during or after Puigdemont presidency is revealing by itself, even though this enumeration has been in use for decades. Nobody seemed to complain when Maragall was appointed 127th president in 2003, for instance. WP:NPOV.

Sources in English from all over the world are pretty clear (not opinion pieces): DailyMail, The Australian, Al Jazeera, The Guardian, The Sunday Times, Harvard College, The Indian Express, etc.

There are thousands of sources in Spanish stating that Puigdemont is the 130th president. Including news pieces (not opinion ones) coming from your own sources that you have shared: eldiario.es (your first link), El País (your second link) and ABC (your third link). Which clearly shows that it isn't a disputed topic. --193.153.142.71 (talk) 18:06, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

193.153.142.71 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) You are edit warring. I have warned you on your TP [9] --BallenaBlanca 🐳 ♂ (Talk) 19:54, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
193.153.142.71. You may not like who disputes the fact, but it is disputed. In any case, the "need" to hard-code invented tradition in Wikipedia infoboxes just for the sake of it surpasses all understanding. [10][11][12].--Asqueladd (talk) 20:07, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Asqueladd. IMO, the best option would be to add a brief section on the page itself, explaining the controversies, keeping the sources that already exist and adding the ones you proposed. --BallenaBlanca 🐳 ♂ (Talk) 20:16, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
For what it is POV and what not. Stating Puidgdemont was the 130th President of the Government of Catalonia in the infobox is POV. Stating Puigdemont was 9th President of the Government of Catalonia is also POV. However stating Puigdemont was "President of the Government of Catalonia" is not POV. The solution seems obvious to me.--Asqueladd (talk) 20:38, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
BallenaBlanca, I also warned you for edit warring on your TP [13]. Stable version must stay before making any changes, that should first be discussed in talk page. I already answered you here with the explanation about why it isn't disputed. So, at this point I think it's clear enough.
Now Asqueladd, this is an encyclopedia, not a blog or an opinion forum. Sources are very clear about the fact that Carles Puigdemont is the 130th president. The fact that there are a small sample of opinion pages that don't like that Puigdemont is the 130th President, is beyond the point. In ABC's news pieces Carles Puigdemont is indeed called the 130th president, despite what their opinion pages say. About your first link, the "Catalan Historians" is a reference to this minor Spanish nationalist association, which has among its very few members a self-declared minister of Tabarnia (not even a Historian). Your last link is, again, about this association. But I don't think Libertad Digital is even worth considering as reliable source.
Here you have a small sample of Spanish media sources from all kind of ideologies referring to Puigdemont as the 130th president:
Since all the reliable sources, Spanish media, English media and official sources don't dispute this, Wikipedia shouldn't be disputing this either (WP:NPOV). --193.153.142.71 (talk) 20:46, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's revealing that you deem sources that actually delve into the historiographic issue as not reliable, while using a fragmentary corpus of sources that mostly do not deal with it at all as "all the reliable" ones? Jordi Canal, professor of the École des hautes études en sciences sociales de París and an actual historian of Catalonia only counts nine, [14]. The thing is there are sources parroting the selfstyle with no questioning, sources claiming the first was instituted in 1359, sources reporting the list of presidents is a 2003 case of invented tradition (detailing the reason for this assertion), sources reporting it is disputed, and sources disputing it. You can for sure loosely peg every source to a particular ideology. There is no need to have this ruckus in the infobox dealing with something that has nothing to do with Puigdemont, but with historiography.--Asqueladd (talk) 21:26, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That was discussed some time ago here [15] and the consensus was that the previous enumeration was the most common one according to reliable sources. It seems it's only disputed by some minor Spanish media and blogs. BallenaBlanca can you provide any new sources that would challenge the previous consensus? The sources you brought in this discussion don't seem to add anything new to what was already said in Wikidata's discussion. List of Presidents of the Government of Catalonia already explains that some historians don't agree with the enumeration. But in all other articles, Wikipedia should use the one that is common in almost all reliable sources. See WP:FLAT. --Aljullu (talk) 21:11, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia should not be obliged to order anything and this has nothing to do with WP:FLAT.--Asqueladd (talk) 21:28, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Look at these interesting data. The Generalitat de Catalunya itself published this [16] Now it has withdrawn, the link is dead [17].

In the text one can read that until the 120th they are not "presidents" but "ecclesiastic deputies". Nor was it called Generalitat de Catalunya but Deputation of the General of Catalonia:

La relació cronològica adjunta recull, per a les èpoques medieval i moderna, els noms dels diputats que, per raó del seu rang, tingueren preeminència protocol·lària per damunt dels altres diputats, fet que amb freqüència els dugué a presidir els actes i a encapçalar els documents de la Diputació del General. Per aquesta causa es tracta sempre de diputats del Braç Eclesiàstic, a excepció del cas de Joan I d'Empúries —diputat del Braç Militar—, sobre el qual recaigué la preeminència pel fet de pertànyer a la família reial. The accompanying chronological list includes, for the medieval and modern periods, the names of the Members who, due to their rank, had a pre-eminent protocol over the other Members, which often led them to preside over the acts and to lead the documents of the Diputación del General. For this reason, it is always the deputies of the Ecclesiastical Arm, except for the case of John I of Empúries - deputy of the Military Arm -, on which the preeminence fell due to belonging to the royal family.

This source [18] makes a detailed explanation of how the Generalitat "metió la pata", "se les vio el plumero" when they published this document [19] Perhaps this is the reason why the link is now dead ... --BallenaBlanca 🐳 ♂ (Talk) 01:08, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

BallenaBlanca... I don't think that you are understanding this. This document is not some sort of "secret proof" of anything, but standard information that can be found at any book about Catalonia's history. The medieval Generalitat was officially called "Diputació del General" (Deputation of the General of Catalonia can be an English translation; there are variations). However, this "Diputació del General" was popularly called "Generalitat" at that time, which became the common name. The ecclesiastic deputies were the ones that presided over the meetings with the rest of deputies, which is why they were eventually called "presidents", and through the centuries they evolved gaining more power. This is why, until the abolition of the medieval Generalitat in 1716 by the Nueva Planta decrees, they were also called "presidents of the Generalitat": Pau Claris i Casademunt, 17th century (Spanish Royal Academy of History). This is why when the modern Generalitat was restored (Spanish Second Republic) it adopted this name, following the medieval one. You can find more information about the Diputació del General or Generalitat in the Spanish or Catalan Wikipedia articles. There you will find the exact same thing I'm telling you here. Or at any history book... --193.153.142.71 (talk) 01:56, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The document is not a secret, but they do not want to show it. They have upload an English version with different content.
The Spanish version of the list of "presidents" does not agree with the English one [20]
The first Wikipedia English version (2003) contained 5 presidents [21]
Then it was reformed and the deputies were added [22] and later they were removed.
Until October 27, 2017 the version contained the 9 presidents [23]
And "very appropriately", it was reformed on 28 October 2017 [24] (remember that the referendum was held on 1 October 2017)
All the press articles that have been used, and are using, the Wikipedia English version as source (we all know that it is the number one source consulted) have relied, and are relying, on a misleading information. So these sources can not be considered reliable references.
This [25] is the original source (extracted from the original source) and it says that they are eclesiastic deputies, not "presidents", except for nine of them.
The claim that the Generalitat is called popularly so since the Medieval age is still unsourced [26]. --BallenaBlanca 🐳 ♂ (Talk) 16:48, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No, BallenaBlanca, it isn't some sort of conspiracy... That PDF document is a fragment of a 3 volume book published in 2003 called "Història de la Generalitat de Catalunya i dels seus presidents", which is free access online here, after registration. That PDF wasn't removed "because the Generalitat doesn't want to show something". This document was accessible until some months ago, when the Catalan Government website was updated, and link was lost. It happened with lots of other PDFs and links, meaning you need to look for the new link. For instance, this was the link about the Catalan museums, which worked fine some months ago, and now it doesn't (now it's here, with same content). In any case, that PDF is in no way saying what you seem to have understood.
Now, about Spanish Wikipedia: The Diputación del General of the Principality of Catalonia or Generalitat de Catalunya
Catalan Wikipedia: The name of the Diputation of the General coexisted with the unofficial Generalitat de Catalunya
About the English Wikipedia, I'm sorry, but you are straight lying: the full list of Catalan Presidents has been stable since 2003: 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2014, 2016... until October 2017, very appropriately, during Catalonia's independence referendum, when some editors begun to contest the list without success. This shows how this debate is nothing else but politically motivated. Because there was permanent and stable consensus until then.
All of this was already discussed here, where Leptictidium gave this accurate explanation for this new polemic: It is therefore obvious that the denialist point of view is rooted not in factual arguments, but in a politicised attempt to delegitimise the offices and institutions of "the other side".
At this point, I don't understand what are you trying to do here, BallenaBlanca. But I can only suggest you that if you really want to learn about the history of the Generalitat, you can look for any history book. As a matter of fact, I have right now one in front of me, published in 1992 in Spanish: "Historia de Catalunya" (Grupo Z, El Periódico). Page 95: "To collect the agreed taxes, another fundamental institution emerged: the Generalitat de Catalunya. Born in the Courts of 1289, it ended up becoming a permanent institution" [...] "The Generalitat, also called «Deputation of the General of Catalonia», was initially" [...]. That page also shows an image, with this text: "Founding document of the Generalitat, dated in 1359". Page 110 of the book: "1359. The Generalitat de Catalunya takes definitive form." In this same book, the presidents of the Diputació del General or Generalitat are indeed called "presidents of the Generalitat de Catalunya" (page 160). I don't know what else do you need, honestly. --193.153.142.71 (talk) 18:15, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

___

Crikey 193.153.142.71's interest in making sure that it is not disputed here that there is continuity between the medieval Generalitat and the present Generalitat (something that historians hotly dispute; I would say in fact the consensus amongst historians if anything is that it is a spurious made up claim, constructed by catalan nationalism in the late 19th century, a claim which certainly does the rounds in the media but lacks any genuine backing in historical fact) is really remarkable. Are you a troll working for the Generalitat? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.44.7.41 (talk) 23:59, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

___

If this enumeration has been in force since the 19th century and has not been disputed until Puigdemont took power in 2016 —in two or three minor Spanish media and blogs—, then it seems to me that the consensus among historians in favor of this is more than proven. In addition, it turns out that in the sources in English there has been no dispute to begin with. Consequently, I see no reason to change the president's ordinal number for Puigdemont in the English Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.158.38.59 (talk) 03:29, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

JFYI. That enumeration exists since 2003 and sources disputing it at least trace back to Artur Mas.--Asqueladd (talk) 04:19, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not really.

  • Els presidents de la Generalitat de Catalunya. L'Hospitalet de Llobregat. December 1982.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
Yes it does. According to the enumeration used in this entry Jordi Pujol would be 126th president, not 125th as source #2 would try to state. You have shown that by late 20th-century and early 21st-century differents attempts to build a list (with different outcomes) may have predated by some years the 2003 one (ca:Josep Maria Solé i Sabaté's História de la Generalitat de Catalunya i dels seus presidents). So much for tradition, huh?.--Asqueladd (talk) 05:20, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Puigdemont's Francoist Past

I am really struck by the absence of any reference to Puigdemont's family background in Carlismo, the traditionalist branch of falange that made Franco into such a popular ruler and figurehead in rural Catalan areas - such as Puigdemont's birthplace. The piece notes that two of Puigdemont's close family were local majors, but it fails to mention that this could only have happened under Franco if they were enlisted as part of the "movimiento", or were local falangistas. This is all reasonably neutral information about his family. It does not mean that the man himself is a francoist. So why is all this information so sensitively ommitted? I have tried to introduce some of it with some serious references, but have been barred, and am told I'm a vandal. What's going on wikipedia? Why are you protecting a fugitive from justice? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.44.7.41 (talk) 19:20, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Carles_Puigdemont&oldid=887365670"