Talk:Catalonia/Archive 6

country
I am editing the definition to match the official definition of Catalonia because of the arguments exposed here: Eloi.sanmartin (talk) 00:11, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * It's the official definition
 * Valencian and Basque communities are stated as countries in their respective WP pages and those same political official status in Spain as Catalonia. The lack of use of the "Catalan country" is because of the extended use of the word Catalonia and does not mean it's not a country as the other "historical nationalities" are.
 * Catalonia is a country according to Catalan Statute of Autonomy, Spanish Constitution, the Catalan Government, the Catalan Encyclopedia...
 * The supposed lack of use of the term Catalan country ( in this WP article: In French, the country is called Catalogne ) can be explained because of historical reasons and does not reflect the current status of Catalonia, this is an Encyclopedia and its definition must be accurate and not rely on historical uses of region names for a present day definition.

hello, I believe that the introduction of the article should put that Catalonia is a country, as well as the article puts Scotland, so also in the Catalan wikipedia is made ​​as a country.--Nord oliver (talk) 23:45, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Country is a vague term that can mean all sorts of things in different contexts, but most commonly will be taken to refer to an independent state, and regardless it's a description that is pretty rarely applied to Catalonia in most English-language sources I'm aware of (which would generally describe it as a "region" of the country of Spain). The UK itself is a bit of an odd case, and there are plenty of serious sources that describe Scotland as a [constituent] country of the UK, hence why it's appropriate for that article. It doesn't matter what the Catalan WP says of course, even if there is a direct translation that can be made of the words used. Also, the wording " .. is a country that is part of Spain as autonomous community in northeastern Iberian Peninsula" currenty there is pretty clunky and badly phrased English. I'm returning this to some variation of the wording that was happily there for a long time until earlier this month, relying on the official terminology. There might be better phrasing than what I end up with, but we need to stick to either common or official terminology when describing the place.  N-HH   talk / edits  19:22, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello, I am not a native English speaker, so I am sorry if I commit some mistakes. I edited the article, but my changes have been undone. I changed first sentence in the introduction "Catalonia [...] is an Autonomous Community" because the concept of Catalonia refers to the catalan nation or country. It is not my opinion, is what is said in the Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia. In the preamble of the Statute is said "Catalunya és un país...", which can be translated to English as "Catalonia is a country...". However, I am conscious of the fact that Engllish speakers wouldn't use the term country to descrive Catalonia. This can be because Catalonia is not a sovereign state, but the term country is wider than that concept. It can refer to nation, as, for instance, Scotland and Wales are. It is widely accepted that Scotland is a country dispite it is not a state. Wheather Catalonia is a country or not cannot depend on the world knowledge about that. It is more a problem about the fact that English speakers do not know that Catalonia is a country, taking in consideration that it was one day a sovereign nation, it has an own and used language and history (and all the other reasons above). What I mean is that I do not see any reason why we can afirm that Scotland is a country and not Catalonia. It is possible too to find serious sources to afirm that Catalonia is a country, it was one day a principality, it has been an independent nation from Spain for several years, and it was one day annexed, but it is still a contry. You well said that English speakers would not use that term to descrive Catalonia, but what I think is that Wikipedia is an enciclopedia to learn what you do not know. In that case who think that Catalonia is not a country and is only a part of Spain is wrong, and Wikipedia is here to help them. All the sources to prove all that could perfectly be enclosed here, but it is only necessary go to "History of Catalonia" to do so. Furthermore, taking in account that 51%nof Catalans would like Catalonia to be an independent country and that a wider majority of people considers themselves as more Catalans than Spanish (see last CEO surveys), it resoults offensive to find in English WP that Catalonia is only a region. I can affirm that most Catalan philologists and historians would agree with my thesis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.196.214.210 (talk) 17:27, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for arguing your point here, but the problem remains that, as I said, in most English language sources, Catalonia - and especially the Catalonia being described here - is not usually referred to as a country (I'm happy to be proved wrong, but I'm fairly sure I won't be). That's the standard by which WP articles are written - what things are called and how they are described according to most serious, reliable external sources (not simply random English people btw), rather than what individual contributors here can argue they should be called, however impeccable the logic seems. That's the case even though country, indeed, can be used to refer to non-sovereign entities and even if the word "pais" is commonly found in Catalan or Spanish sources. The cultural geography and politics of Catalan nationalism can be - and are - explained regardless, both here and in other articles, such as Països Catalans and Catalan nationalism.  N-HH   talk / edits  10:51, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

In that case we should change the article about Scotland, shouldn't we? And please, don't tell me that Scotland is a true country, and that the case of Catalonia is only an opinion of some, and that we can find in reliable sources that Scotland is a Country. That's because the Catalan case is not well known in the world, it's not about a bad translation. You can argue your point using English sources and I can do the same using Catalan ones. The fact is that the article is about Catalonia and not about England, so in that case a Catalan source should be more reliable, shouldn't it? Anyway, if I cannot convince you (I'm sure I won't) what happens? I mean, what happens when in WP users aren't agree with each other? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.196.214.210 (talk) 14:04, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Again, by talking about what constitutes a "true" country, and by pressing on what Catalan language sources say, you're missing the point twice over. This isn't about logic or analytical proof, or arguing a case, or convincing the world of a little-known fact; plus, translation is rarely precise. The issue is much simpler than that: it's about what words are commnly used in the English language - in "official" documents and self-definitions, as well as in reliable and reputable third-party sources - to describe and classify things. Scotland is regularly called a country, including in ISO nomenclature for example and on the Scottish government website - but that's an issue for that page if you want to debate it. By contrast, and this is what matters here, Catalonia is more often AFAICT simply referred to as a region of the country of Spain, eg here by the BBC (which actually this article's lead avoids doing, so if anything you should count yourself lucky), or more formally - for example even on the Generalitat's website - as an "autonomous community", as our article does. You have to change what the rest of the English-speaking world does, and then come and get this page to reflect that, not make this page forge a new or minority path to prove a political point. Anyway, I'm just another editor, like yourself, with no special powers, but this debate and similar ones have been done to death in the past. You can always ask for a third opinion. Perhaps have a look at basic policies here as well, such as WP:V, WP:NOR and WP:RS.  N-HH   talk / edits  20:59, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
 * ps: you can sign your contributions on talk pages by marking your post with four tildes.
 * At the least you have to appreciate the Catalan nationalist viewpoint. I mean it is in the constitution as a country even if it doesn't meet our definition, It is a significant viewpoint. Furthermore there is reference everywhere in English Catalonia and Spain articles of the basque country. That doesn't meet out definition yet it it is still called a country. I don't see why everyone is knit-picking and cant respect and acknowledge well established viewpoints. PortlandOregon97217 (talk) 05:28, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
 * As noted in comments above, the Catalan nationalist viewpoint is respected and represented, on this page and others relating to Catalan issues. The issue here is simply how we briefly define and categorise Catalonia in the opening sentence. And, as also noted, "country", which as a term has multiple definitions and meanings, is, regardless, simply not the main descriptor for Catalonia in mainstream English-language sources. By contrast, the "Basque Country" is commonly referred to in those words; although here the word country forms part of a proper term and in fact said entity would not commonly be referred to as being a country, odd though that might seem to some. Any nitpicking here is coming only from those constantly trying to take apart those rather simple points and make the basic question as highlighted above more complicated than it really is by turning it into some meta-debate about what Catalonia really "is" and by suggesting that the use or non-use of certain words is a grand political statement against Catalan independence (and, again, it's worth noting we do not use what is probably the most commonly found English-language term, region, which suggests the lead here is, if anything, overly sensitive to Catalan nationalism, not ignoring it). Btw your edit here is mischaracterised. The quote marks are not scare quotes, they are actual quote marks, as "nationality" is the literal translation of the Spanish word nacionalidad, but it does not quite make sense in English in that context. Again, the use of them is common in reputable sources, eg the Economist.  N-HH   talk / edits  09:16, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 15 one external links on Catalonia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130524103451/http://www.enciclopedia.cat/fitxa_v2.jsp?NDCHEC=0016436 to http://www.enciclopedia.cat/fitxa_v2.jsp?NDCHEC=0016436
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091215151546/http://www.gencat.cat:80/catalunya/eng/historia/historia2.htm to http://www.gencat.cat/catalunya/eng/historia/historia2.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120118151355/http://www.racalacarta.com/audio/audio_rac1/Racometre28setembre.pdf to http://www.racalacarta.com/audio/audio_rac1/Racometre28setembre.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071013022212/http://www.constitucion.es:80/constitucion/castellano/titulo_preliminar.html to http://www.constitucion.es/constitucion/castellano/titulo_preliminar.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091113212952/http://www.idescat.cat:80/territ/BasicTerr?TC=5&V0=5&V1=08&V3=863&V4=435&ALLINFO=TRUE&PARENT=1&GERMANS=TRUE&CTX=B to http://www.idescat.cat/territ/BasicTerr?TC=5&V0=5&V1=08&V3=863&V4=435&ALLINFO=TRUE&PARENT=1&GERMANS=TRUE&CTX=B
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100704031039/http://www10.gencat.net/ptop/AppJava/cat/plans/general/ptgeneral.jsp to http://www10.gencat.net/ptop/AppJava/cat/plans/general/ptgeneral.jsp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080513132200/http://www10.gencat.net:80/ptop/AppJava/cat/plans/parcials/ptapa/aprovacio_definitiva.jsp to http://www10.gencat.net/ptop/AppJava/cat/plans/parcials/ptapa/aprovacio_definitiva.jsp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090325180143/http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/atlas/spain/factsheets/pdf/fact_es51_en.pdf to http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/atlas/spain/factsheets/pdf/fact_es51_en.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081029161516/http://www.pdf.lacaixa.comunicacions.com/im/esp/199507rkg_esp.pdf to http://www.pdf.lacaixa.comunicacions.com/im/esp/199507rkg_esp.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090113202524/http://www15.gencat.net:80/pres_catalunya_dades/AppPHP/cat/poblacio.htm to http://www15.gencat.net/pres_catalunya_dades/AppPHP/cat/poblacio.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090717065158/http://blogs.periodistadigital.com:80/ultimahora.php/2006/06/17/llaman_lputo_inmigrante_espanolr_al_padr to http://blogs.periodistadigital.com/ultimahora.php/2006/06/17/llaman_lputo_inmigrante_espanolr_al_padr
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090717060618/http://blogs.periodistadigital.com:80/ultimahora.php/2006/02/02/la_justicia_obliga_a_una_escuela_de_bada to http://blogs.periodistadigital.com/ultimahora.php/2006/02/02/la_justicia_obliga_a_una_escuela_de_bada
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131029193345/http://www.diariodenoticias.com/ediciones/2007/10/02/sociedad/navarra/d02nav6.1020817.php to http://www.diariodenoticias.com/ediciones/2007/10/02/sociedad/navarra/d02nav6.1020817.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090325180133/http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/education_culture/publ/pdf/language/highreport_en.pdf to http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/education_culture/publ/pdf/language/highreport_en.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090227050231/http://bergueda.com:80/lapatum/festa.asp to http://www.bergueda.com/lapatum/festa.asp

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

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 20:58, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Religion
The entire section, with subsections, was empty. we dont want that in an article. add content, then create sections as needed. heres what i removed:Mercurywoodrose (talk) 23:29, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Political status of Catalonia
A user has added Catalonia is defined as a nationality by its Statute of Autonomy. The Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia used the term "nation" before being modified by the Spanish Constitutional Court. I don't think it's correct to say Catalonia is defined as a nationality by its Statute of Autonomy, but he doesn't let me change it. How could you solve this? — Jɑuмe (dis-me) 00:03, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * What do the actual sources say?-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 04:32, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
 * looking at the court case before the Spanish constitutional court, nation as used seems devoid of any actual legal meaning. Written as it is in the lead seems there is some undue weight.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 04:59, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
 * In the section "Legal challenge ...", many statements are made in the following paragraph that appear to need sourcing, one already being challenged:


 * After four years of deliberations, the Constitutional Court of Spain assessed the constitutionality of the challenged articles and its binding assessment was released on June 28 of 2010. By a 6 to 4 majority, the Court's justices rewrote 14 articles and dictated the interpretation for 27 more, mainly relating to language, justice and fiscal policy. The judgement reassured that the term "nation" used in the preamble has no legal standing. It left without effect any of the legal clauses that could have guaranteed a true measure of self-government for Catalonia. It also abolished all the mechanisms that had been put in place to minimize the distortionary effects of the existing Spanish tax and transfer system.


 * However, I've just read the La Vanguardia source of 2010, given after the last sentence above, and it seems to provide enough support for all the statements I've just quoted. Perhaps each statement needs to directly cite the source?  Yet to answer the OP's question as best I can, there's no support in that source for asserting that "Catalonia is defined as a nationality by its Statute of Autonomy". yoyo (talk) 02:12, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, I consider myself pretty impartial to the whole issue and I also don't find a mention of any "historical nation" in the source that's been posted. It may be true, indeed, but as it is, I find it somewhat misleading.--Dk1919 (talk) 23:40, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Map warriors
The articles of all the autonomous communities of Spain use the same type of map where it distinguishes itself to the region in red, the sea appears in blue and the rest of the country in yellow. Some independentists or nationalistic users insist on adding maps in the articles of Catalonia, Basque Country and Valencian Community as if these regions were countries of the European Union, to scale of the whole continent, of gray and green color, and there do not appear all the autonomous communities (as Canaries). It is absolutely intolerable and inadmissible. These regions must use the same type of map. Satesclop 15:41, 4 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Why?
 * I mean, as a Galician independentist person (and independence is still a non derogatory word in Spanish), why should these people have the same map, or speak the same language? I propose a referendum, you know, because democracy...--Froaringus (talk) 19:55, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I am not here to do politics. Your ideology is all the same to me. The reality is that they are Spanish regions. I do not know what they will be in the future but now yes.Satesclop 02:24, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I think many non-nationalist and spanish nationalist readers would see autonomous communities (the main topic of these set of entries) are from an administrative standpoint roughly the same, and they value consistence, irrespective of how people in there feel or speak. Then there are other readers (both nationalist themselves and also people sympathetic towards the narrative of "nations without state") who deem appropiate to insert a feel-good map, making a fuss of it. Some of them would even probably try to weave a convoluted argument (attempting to rationalise the irrational) pointing out how their "Estatuto" says their territory is a "nationality", and, rightly so, (ta daaa!) the map needs to internationalise and be different from the rest, because any other solution would "insult them". Cheers.--Asqueladd (talk) 22:06, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
 * It is not reasonable. Independently of the political ideas of the users, the reality is that Catalonia or the Valencian Community are regions of Spain, autonomous communities. There must be equality with the rest of Spanish regions. This green map is totally inappropriate and slanted.Satesclop 02:21, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Beware! Don't call them regions. Irrespective of what region actually means (a rather generic and non derogatory jack-of-all-trades term), users are going to come in here in order to pull a straw man out of it. The case of the Basque Country is different: you can make a case about the importance of the Treviño enclave being distinguished "a tad" better (hehe).--Asqueladd (talk) 10:00, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

I addressed the issue on Talk:Valencian Community. Peter238 (talk) 03:32, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Lock
As the article has been locked by : I suggest to change the current version of the article to the previous consensus text. — Jɑuмe (dis-me) 16:16, 19 February 2016 (UTC)


 * To clarify the proposal on the table, the current version here puts the (Madrid) Spanish names first, and the Catalan / Occidentale versions second, while the other version has them the other way round. There is also a difference in a footnote explaining the province's status following the 2006 Statute of Autonomy Consistent with our policy on full-page protection, I am hesitant on stepping into a deeply-held political dispute and simply protected on whatever the last version was. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  16:32, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * That's right. The language order here is alphabetical, while in the Valencian Country the order is according to officiality and usage. As you can read in the sources Satesclop is contesting Catalonia (is an autonomous community that) has been defined as a nation, just like Scotland and England. However, as "Spain is different" (an old fashioned politic style) Spain's Constitutional court rejected such declaration and replaced the term nation by the former denomination (nationality). This current result and the text (in this article) hide such reality. How would you solve the issue? — Jɑuмe (dis-me) 23:03, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Ritchie333, why do you say Catalonia is a province (like Quebec [within Canada], or Lleida [within Catalonia])? — Jɑuмe (dis-me)
 * Furthermore Satesclop has replaced a temporary consensus map we had here by an older one, plus he's going against other consensus... Could you repair that? — Jɑuмe (dis-me) 00:03, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 21 February 2016
Please remove the comma immediately after the closing parenthesis in the first sentence of the article. Thank you!

—Granger (talk · contribs) 20:21, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The protection is since expired. Even so, I removed the comma for you anyway :) — This, that and the other (talk) 10:50, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Catalonia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120525071039/http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5hCUSkWOROQvtXQvPrgGjjE3dZWag to http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5hCUSkWOROQvtXQvPrgGjjE3dZWag

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 08:33, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 10 May 2016

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

The result of the move request was: Speedy closed as unfounded (NAC). No such user (talk) 09:08, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Catalonia → Catalunya – "Catalonia" violates WP article name policy on foreign names. It is not a majority usage. (Only in the U.K.) It is not how most people would look for the topic. We don't use "Saragossa" for the same reason. deisenbe (talk) 14:00, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose. That's silly. It's Catalonia in English. Sources are so overwhelming that I'm not going to waste (more) time on this. &mdash; Rwxrwxrwx (talk) 14:32, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Snow close - User has not given a valid reason which supports the proposal. WP:Commonname, would support 'Catalonia'. --  AxG /  ✉  / 10 years of editing  17:24, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose - proposal is nonsense, current title is undoubtedly common name in English.--Staberinde (talk) 20:52, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose and snow close. This proposal was made under the assumption that "Catalunya" was the common name outside the UK, which does not appear to be the case.  ONR  (talk) 23:48, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Uhhh...no. —  AjaxSmack  01:42, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Heck, even the Generalitat calls itself the |"Government of Catalonia" in English. acomas (talk) 04:31, 11 May 2016 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Original research
There is plenty of it. Remember, we have to use WP:Secondary sources. Thanks. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 04:38, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Catalonia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://es.encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761556976_1____4/Catalunya_Catalu%C3%B1a.html#s4
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070926005145/https://search.boe.es/datos/imagenes/BOE/1993/074/A09308.tif to http://search.boe.es/datos/imagenes/BOE/1993/074/A09308.tif
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041231045929/https://www.catalanencyclopaedia.com:80/ to http://www.catalanencyclopaedia.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:31, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 one external links on Catalonia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090113202504/http://www.gencat.net:80/generalitat/eng/guia/antecedents/antecedents15.htm to http://www.gencat.net/generalitat/eng/guia/antecedents/antecedents15.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090113202509/http://www.gencat.net:80/generalitat/eng/guia/antecedents/antecedents16.htm to http://www.gencat.net/generalitat/eng/guia/antecedents/antecedents16.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100303223008/http://www.gencat.cat:80/generalitat/eng/estatut/titol_4.htm to http://www.gencat.cat/generalitat/eng/estatut/titol_4.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090113100832/http://www.gencat.net:80/generalitat/eng/estatut/titol_preliminar.htm to http://www.gencat.net/generalitat/eng/estatut/titol_preliminar.htm#a1
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110908023751/http://www.matthewbennett.es/60/is-catalonia-a-nation-or-a-nationality-or-is-spain-the-only-nation-in-spain/ to http://www.matthewbennett.es/60/is-catalonia-a-nation-or-a-nationality-or-is-spain-the-only-nation-in-spain/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101118110601/http://www.ine.es/jaxi/menu.do?L=0&type=pcaxis&path=%2Ft20%2Fe260%2Fa2009%2F&file=pcaxis&N= to http://www.ine.es/jaxi/menu.do?type=pcaxis&path=%2Ft20%2Fe260%2Fa2009%2F&file=pcaxis&N=&L=0
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080528011550/http://www.gencat.cat/generalitat/eng/estatut/titol_preliminar.htm#a6 to http://www.gencat.cat/generalitat/eng/estatut/titol_preliminar.htm#a6
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110706214434/http://www.asabadell.cat/ca/notices/2010/04/els_nous_catalanoparlants_defensen_la_llengua_catalana_8694.php to http://www.asabadell.cat/ca/notices/2010/04/els_nous_catalanoparlants_defensen_la_llengua_catalana_8694.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140716172102/http://www.marianne.net/Meilleur-restaurant-du-monde-grand-prix-de-la-tourista-internationale_a228545.html to http://www.marianne.net/Meilleur-restaurant-du-monde-grand-prix-de-la-tourista-internationale_a228545.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:21, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Independence
So currently Junts pel Si controls the Generalitat, and they are pro-independence, and are beginning the creation of Catalunya as an independent entity. Would anyone object if I were to begin writing a section on Catalunya's road to independence? Regardless of your opinion on it, or on the constitution of Spain, that this is happening is indisputable. (2607:F470:6:5002:913C:E430:DB87:4DA6 (talk) 16:27, 1 September 2016 (UTC))
 * You can proceed to add more information. — Jɑuмe (dis-me) 06:20, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Respeto al Reino de España
Wikipedia surgió como una enciclopedia libre que tenía como único objetivo ofrecer información a los usuarios de forma gratuita. No podemos consentir que esta página, la de una Comunidad Autónoma de España, se convierta en un campo de batalla político en el que gestos como poner en primer plano un mapa de Cataluña EQUIPARÁNDOLA A OTRAS NACIONES DE EUROPA o como eliminar referencias al país al que pertenece (España). Dejemos de crear polémica y controversia con estos temas y editemos de forma más responsable. --Cd tenerife (talk) 15:43, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
 * This article is trying to be objective in this matter. Right now it is showing there is a big issue in Spanish and Catalan politics and we need to reflect it. — Jɑuмe (dis-me) 06:24, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * No hay que confundir un proceso que quieren llevar a cabo ciertos partidos políticos independentistas en Cataluña con la REALIDAD OBJETIVA. Cataluña pertenece a España, nadie ha proclamado la independencia y ningún país del mundo lo reconoce como tal, pero viendo la línea que se está siguiendo, lo próximo será poner la estelada para "reflejar la realidad" que se quiere inventar. --Cd tenerife (talk) 23:10, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Location map


I have learned from the Help desk that there is a disagreement about what location map to use for this article. I understand that this argument is motivated by politics, and the issue of whether Catalonia is "part of Spain". I am not interested in that argument, and I don't know or care which side the participants in the argument are on. The purpose of a location map is to help people who don't already know, to understand out where it is. I have restored the map which I believe does this more effectively. Maproom (talk) 22:05, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Catalonia is part of Spain and Europe, the map doesn't say it is not Lliure albir (talk) 22:36, 10 January 2016 (UTC)


 * That's absurd, Lliure albir. Green map is typical of EU countries, not of regions. It's too big to locate a single region on the continenT. The other regions of Spain used the same red map. I pray end war editions. Satesclop 22:46, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I oppose Satesclop and I agree with Lliure albir, the map doesn't indicate Catalonia is not part of Spain since Spain is highlighted. — Jɑuмe (dis-me) 23:08, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Maproom, you're not being neutral, the map was added in July 2015 by certain user and no one has opposed it, only  Satesclop.  Could you explain why the map you restored is better? IMO it is a worse map, because it doesn't show the position of Catalonia within Europe and the world, and because the current political situation of Catalonia and Spain is somewhat special — Jɑuмe (dis-me) 00:25, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * So, that means that we can eliminate the maps of Flanders and Scotland from their respective infoboxes because they show the situation inside Europe? Why Scotland can and Catalonia not? --Jacobí (talk) 01:34, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree with Jacobí. If Catalonia can't use this type of map, no other polities in Europe should. BlueBirdo (talk) 17:08, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I prefer the map I restored because I believe that most readers will find it more helpful in showing the position and extent of Catalonia. I am not concerned about the political status of Catalonia, this is a location map. I can see that it might be improved: "in Spain" could be deleted from the caption, the inset showing the Canaries would be better removed, and the colouring (white for Spain, ginger for France, Andorra and Portugal) could all be made white. I could do that myself if it would help. Maproom (talk) 08:37, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I prefer the green map (above), for me it's more helpful than the current one. I think most people are more familiar with the shape of Europe than with Spain. BlueBirdo (talk) 17:02, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * So, can we restore the green map or not? meanwhile, I restore the original map from July, as a kind of consensus, because it shows Catalonia in Europe but, at the same time, without the European Union and with the borders of the other autonomous communities of Spain, showing clearly Catalonia as a part of Spain. Are you agree? --Jacobí (talk) 13:28, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I really dislike that green map, and all such maps with the inset in the top left overlying Greenland. The inset is intended to help the reader locate Europe, within a tiny world map that is itself made hard to understand by the way it abuts Greenland and other islands. I think that the number of readers who can understand the inset, and would not otherwise be able to locate Europe on a map of the world, must be 0. If the consensus is in favour of using that map, I can produce a modified version of it with the northern 30% trimmed off. Maproom (talk) 12:52, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Most of us agreed to use the green map with Europe, so I think it's good Jacobí restored it. I would also request to use the same type of map for the Balearics and Valencia, as we have many visitors from Europe and all over the world. By doing this our visitors could contrast their original location with ours and would make them feel more welcome :) — Jɑuмe (dis-me) 13:04, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I know I'm a bit late to this, but I'd also like to add my opinion and concur with the consensus. I've reverted the map several times now, and believe that the green map is most suitable, as it shows Catalunya's position not just in the Iberian Peninsula, but also in Europe as a whole. I also concur that this follows precedent with other areas that are in Catalunya's current political situation, and I believe that this better represents the situation on the ground. I know that this may be distasteful for spanish nationalists, but it does best convey the information about the State. You know, I leave my flat in the morning and I see the Estelada everywhere, the only time I ever see the spanish flag is on official buildings, below the Senyera. I go to the cafe, and am greeted with "Bon Dia," not "Bueños." If someone says "Aquí en España...," the first response is, "Catalunya no es Espanya." This is the reality, so why pettifog it? (Alcibiades979 (talk) 09:23, 14 May 2016 (UTC))
 * Easy: because things are what they are and not what we wish they would be. Catalonia is STILL part of Spain, and it should be reflected as such (within the Spanish map) in what pretends to be an encyclopedia. Facts; that easy. And it is a fact that Catalonia TODAY is part of Spain. Let's not rewrite history and geography on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not the place for that. I am sick of Spanish and Catalan nationalists fighting here... PS: I doubt anyone would say "Bueños" instead of "buenos".--Karljoos (talk) 00:07, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I take issue with the map that presents Catalonia as if it were a part of the EU - it is not, and can't be, because it's not a proper country. It is a part of Spain, a country that already is a part of the EU. All other autonomous community's pages on WP have the yellow-red type of map, and there's no valid reason not to use it here. Reverted. WP is not a place for propaganda. Mr KEBAB (talk) 20:10, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
 * The current map doesn't show Catalonia is not in Spain or independent (yet). Moreover Catalonia is not the only territory in Spain and Europe with a green map (see the Basque Country and Scotland)... The fact that Catalonia is politically disconnecting from a stubborn country like Spain (see the latest news concerning this issue) shows the reality and not a dream like the previous user said. — Jɑuмe (dis-me) 21:05, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
 * The point is that because of that map, it can be easily interpreted to be an "EU country" when, in fact, it's not even a country to begin with. Wishes of the people of Catalonia are irrelevant in this case, it's the current state of affairs that matters (which is Catalonia = Spain). The same applies to Basque Country. Mr KEBAB (talk) 21:16, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
 * It's a "nation" within another nation, the same as Scotland (which also has a green map). Spain and Catalonia are not the same thing, although the latest is (still) a constituent part of the former. The same can't apply to the Basque Country because it has a separate consensus and it has different agreements with the Spanish state. — Jɑuмe (dis-me) 21:43, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
 * We're not talking nations here. You misunderstood me. Mr KEBAB (talk) 21:57, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
 * And could we actually stop pretending that there's a consensus to use the zoomed-out map? There clearly isn't! Mr KEBAB (talk) 15:13, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
 * The map is fine as is. It shows that Catalunya is currently a part of Spain. It also shows where the heck Catalunya is in Europe. This really seems like a non-issue. It's been agreed upon, if you disagree then you're free to go about the requisite process to change that. Until such a time I will report vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alcibiades979 (talk • contribs) 22:51, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Wasting space on two maps is an issue. Can you tell me what's actually been 'agreed upon'? I see no real consensus in this discussion. Mr KEBAB (talk) 13:49, 14 September 2016 (UTC) I'm still waiting for your response. Avoiding responding for almost 3 months and baseless threats to report me for alleged vandalism will get you nowhere. Mr KEBAB (talk) 10:12, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Mr KEBAB I think these users are emotionally involved and pretend to make a fuzz about a special situation in Catalonia (like if it were a special snowflake or something like that... Catalunya, nou estat d'Europa). They tried to pull the same for the Valencian Community, if I can recall, though. From a political-geographic standpoint the territory is roughly the same than the rest of autonomous communities of Spain and of course a region of a sovereign state. Surely the first map offers a different alternative (arbitrary) scope, but so we can say the same about nearly every region of a sovereign state (you can count the exceptions to the country as primary focus with the fingers of a hand). Nonetheless, I think a multiple map option (one on screen, the rest collapsed) was habilitated in en:wiki. Dit it?--Asqueladd (talk) 10:35, 30 November 2016 (UTC)


 * You're wrong, it is a nationality of Spain (constituted as an "autonomous entity") that wants to be recognised as a nation and wants to decide its own future. The current Catalan government (lead by "Together for Yes") and a majority of the citizens of Catalonia support these views.


 * We're not hiding the green map, since most users (above) have accepted to use it and shows the fact that the Catalan people are yearning for changes. — Jɑuмe (dis-me) 06:06, 1 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Yeah, but people voting on Talk:Valencian Community were enough of critical thinkers not to let that happen.


 * The fact is that Catalonia is not an independent country. What the Catalans want and whether the Catalan government supports that is irrelevant to the fact that right now it's nothing more than a part of Spain, what should be reflected in the way its represented on the infobox map - the same as the rest of Spain.


 * 5 users out of 8 (if I'm counting correctly) is not 'most'. Mr KEBAB (talk) 09:53, 1 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Critical thinkers? They were not honest and they did "canvassing"... Are you real?


 * The green map doesn't say it is not in Spain nor independent, can't you see Spain has a different colour than the rest of Europe? — Jɑuмe (dis-me) 10:39, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * By the rest of Spain, do you mean the Basque Country? The Basque Country is a good example to follow— Jɑuмe (dis-me) 10:40, 1 December 2016 (UTC)


 * One of them did canvassing - a policy with which, by the way, I strongly disagree. It's probably to a high degree ineffective (people just do that covertly). Everyone should be allowed to invite other users to vote in whatever manner they choose.


 * Mr KEBAB (talk) 11:17, 1 December 2016 (UTC)


 * No, I meant a map like Community of Madrid has. Mr KEBAB (talk) 11:17, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Again. Catalonia does not govern itself significantly different than the rest of autonomous communities. The entry may need to adress that with the map: be consistent in relation to a limited set of articles, the autonomous communities of Spain, whose main criteria in regards of this issue also happens to be consistent to a larger set of files (most of subdivisions of sovereign states). When the so called Procès leads Catalonia to de facto become Transnistria (de facto totally breaking up with the sovereign state) or Puerto Rico (reaching a consensus with the sovereign state to be a special snowflake) or when it gets recognition as independent state we may need to adress that issue of putting the thing on worldwide perspective (why precisely the EU if the EU is a club of sovereign states?) but it is not the case, so far. Maps do not get well with bruised feelings but with de facto changes of the control of the territory. Vilipendiated or not the the ominous grip of the Spanish State is still alive and well in the land of butifarra. Best regards.--Asqueladd (talk) 11:46, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

@ First off, why haven't I replied? If you click on my name you'll see that I was on a sabbatical, not literally of course, just wasn't editing wiki. Next, why are there two maps? Because the first suggests a relationship between Catalunya, and Spain that is equivalent to that between Scotland, and the UK. The second suggests a relationship between Catalunya, and Spain that is equivalent to that between... well Castilla y León and Spain. This is already known. So there's no consensus between the two opposing factions as to which map best represents Catalunya's relationship with Spain, and as such, the two maps are the closest thing we can get to a compromise. I agree though, two maps do look stupid, you should be the bigger man, and agree to go with the first ^_^. (Alcibiades979 (talk) 13:24, 16 December 2016 (UTC))
 * I agree that it is not necessary to have two maps in the same infobox that in the end show the same thing: the location of Catalonia in Spain and Europe in the first map and the location of Catalonia only in Spain in the second. As the author of the first map, I propose to make an extension in the first map of the area in which Catalonia is located to make it easier to locate it. I put, for example, the map of Flanders or Scotland. What do you think? --Martí8888 (talk) 11:01, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

@ Apoyo tu idea. Creo que puede ser un punto medio de entendimiento, aunque no entiendo por qué se intenta buscar conflicto en algo tan simple: Cataluña es una Comunidad Autónoma de España. El día que se independice, si es que llega ese momento algún día, ya se modificará el artículo, pero mientras tanto debemos respetar la soberanía de los países. Un saludo. --Cd tenerife (talk) 23:16, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Would you please, talk, use English here? Thank you.--Karljoos (talk) 23:26, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * @ This is Alcibiades979, momentarily forgot my password, haha. I would be fine with this, the thing is it would require permission from those who are for the Spanish map, as well. It's kind of funny the Catalunya English wiki page is a weird sort of hybrid between the Catalan page, and the Castilian page, even down to the maps. 200.118.174.199 (talk) 16:08, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * It would require making some sense, haha. Actually I don't see a reason other than the special snowflake syndrome and bruised feelings (unencyclopaedic purposes) to put that map.--Asqueladd (talk) 18:35, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Well if you don't understand, there's plenty of resources to learn such as: http://cat.elpais.com/cat/2017/01/22/catalunya/1485124749_040802.html sin embargo, sí Catalunya no es especial, porque ahora El Pais Vasco también quiere un referéndum, jajajajaja. Ara és l'hora 181.143.50.179 (talk) 00:48, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

@ I'm agree with you Martí, it's a good and useful idea. If you can make an Scottish style map, that means, Europe without the EU green, showing, like the current, the location of Catalonia in Europe and a square focusing Spain which included the borders of the other autonomous communities, it will be perfect. Better if you modify the current map instead of create another new. Thank you very much, greetings! --Jacobí (talk) 18:56, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * The map for Catalonia should be the same map as the maps shown for any other administrative subdivision of Spain. I am very tired of Spaniard Catalonians and non-Catalonian Spaniards fighting their political wars on Wikipedia. I say we go with what Catalonia is legally within Spain, the European Union, and to the international institutions.Karljoos (talk) 16:16, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
 * @ I do not see why Catalonia has to have the same map as that of other autonomous communities. The maps of Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland also show each country in the UK and in Europe. Catalonia is a historical nationality, as it defends its autonomy status, and I really do not know why it could not have a map showing its territory in Spain and in Europe. I don't want it to appear that Catalonia is not currently part of Spain, the European Union or international institutions, and for this reason and according to the majority of users who have written on this discussion page, I will update the file showing Catalonia in Europe and Spain, with the borders of other autonomous communities and without the green of the European Union. --Martí8888 (talk) 17:01, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * @ As far as I know the legal status of Catalonia within Spain is not as it is for Scotland in the UK. And I do not see a majority of people agreeing on it, Marti888. I think there are far too many people defending their political agendas here. Do not change it without having a proper consensus. Thank you.--Karljoos (talk) 16:00, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree with Marti8888's proposal Lliure albir (talk) 16:57, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Catalonia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130826045656/http://www.parlament-cat.net/porteso/estatut/estatut_angles_100506.pdf to http://www.parlament-cat.net/porteso/estatut/estatut_angles_100506.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101019003946/http://usuarios.multimania.es/Maarian/Catalunya/historiacataluna/las_cortes_catalanas_.htm to http://usuarios.multimania.es/maarian/Catalunya/historiacataluna/las_cortes_catalanas_.htm
 * Added tag to http://www.grec.cat/cgibin/heccl2.pgm?USUARI=&SESSIO=&PGMORI=&NDCHEC=0224004
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.gencat.net/generalitat/eng/guia/antecedents/antecedents15.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.gencat.net/generalitat/eng/guia/antecedents/antecedents16.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.gencat.cat/generalitat/eng/estatut/titol_4.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131014181236/http://www.einesceo.cat/evolutius/referendum-per-la-independencia-de-catalunya-/39 to http://www.einesceo.cat/evolutius/referendum-per-la-independencia-de-catalunya-/39
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.gencat.net/generalitat/eng/estatut/titol_preliminar.htm

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:42, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Catalonia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150930003326/http://resultats.parlament2015.cat/09AU/DAU09999CM_L4.htm to http://resultats.parlament2015.cat/09AU/DAU09999CM_L4.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090113100832/http://www.gencat.net/generalitat/eng/estatut/titol_preliminar.htm to http://www.gencat.net/generalitat/eng/estatut/titol_preliminar.htm

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:04, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

etymology
Right now, the Etymology and pronunciation section, after a paragraph describing the early attestations of the term, we have a paragraph giving the Gothia Launia/Gothland and Goth-Alania theories. Then, there's a line that says "Other less plausible or recent theories suggest:" with a bullet points giving some more ideas.

This seems very awkward. How do we decide which theories belong before the "less plausible or recent theories" section and which go inside it? If some of the the latter are really not very plausible, perhaps they don't merit inclusion in the encyclopedia at all (it seems strange to list ideas with the proviso that they are less reliable without giving some indication of their significance as misconceptions). Maybe we should just have bullet points for all the proposed etymologies, roughly in order of when they are first attested as being put forward. – Greg Pandatshang (talk) 22:29, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Introduction too long
I would suggest reducing the length of the introduction part of the article. Its length is about double the average introductive part of other regions or countries. --88.13.59.194 (talk) 22:02, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I've just removed an unsourced paragraph from the WP:Lead that was added since the above comment was made, and I added a tag stating that the lead is too long. Basically, it is very wordy, and much of it covers details that should be left to other articles in Wikipedia. WP:BRD. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 18:01, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Update the political situation of the Catalonia page to match Kosovo?
Hi Wiki people,

With the regional government claiming independence while the central government refusing to recognise the vote, there seems to be a lot of similarities between the current situation to that of Kosovo. Irrespective of the opinion about the rights or wrongs/ legalities or illegalities, I believe the pages should be updated to reflect accordingly.
 * Please educate yourself! Nobody has claimed anything! A referendum is far from independence. There aren't even one-sided declarations yet, so the article isn't supposed to reflect anything whatsoever. Stop with the talk about Kosovo! --92.75.107.147 (talk) 22:58, 1 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Catalonia is declaring independence as the results have shown well over 90% support independence. This situation is distinct from Kosovo. 174.119.80.219 (talk) 02:07, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Let's wait until the independence is declared. --Saqib (talk) 10:34, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree with that. But once it is, assuming it is - I think we should try to be balanced and treat Catalonia as other non or only partially unrecognised states in europe. Richardeast (talk) 15:34, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Richardeast, if you want to be "balanced" then you wait. It is not a "non or only partially unrecognised state" (you lost us there in the negations); it still is what it was a few days ago, the IP's pathetic "IT IS FREE" notwithstanding. Drmies (talk) 15:58, 2 October 2017 (UTC)


 * The article states > "According to Catalan officials, around 2.26 million out of 5.34 million voters were able to vote" - but actually the Catalan officials' claim is that 3.03 million voted but of those only 2.63 ballot papers could be counted because 770,000 were seized by the Spanish.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.3.128.75 (talk) 14:57, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

It appears that the Catalan Parliament will ratify the results tomorrow, so the UDI is not expected until Friday, at the earliest. Culloty82 (talk) 12:20, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
 * When looking at how the situation is evolving, we should take action and prepare the "Republic of Catalonia" article, so fire up your sandboxes! Hazbulator™ 10:51, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * We now have a definitive date for the UDI, with the Generalitat proclaiming the Republic of Catalonia on Monday. Culloty82 (talk) 14:07, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Minor Edit Needed
OK, this article is not subject to editing, but the last sentence in the opening section contains this clause, " Catalonia has regained considerable local autonomy in political, educational, environmental, and cultural autonomy." The second word "autonomy" should be replaced with the word "affairs". 2602:306:8BC7:1DD0:C9A7:6D80:2E39:4B29 (talk) 17:50, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Sounds right, will do. -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:52, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 October 2017
Change "Prominent Catalan polititians inSpain." to "Prominent Catalan polititians in Spain." 2.24.206.56 (talk) 18:47, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅  JTP (talk • contribs) 19:19, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Since this is the English language wikipedia, please change polititians to politicians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:1810:B414:7900:6022:3544:B224:DF8B (talk) 19:45, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅   Jjm596    &#9993;  20:01, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Declare it a proto-state?
It is a major mistake, the product of radical nationalist misinformation, to place this article under protection while giving equal weight to a Naci coup d'état, and to the international rule of law as represented by the Spanish law. Shame on you, administrators. Please remedy this as soon as possible. The Estelada flag is not even the official flag of Catalonia. This is plain NAUSEOUS.

Considering today’s declaration of independence and subsequent several-week suspension in order to pursue negotiations, would it be accurate to declare Catalonia a proto-state? — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Kip (talk • contribs) 01:44, 11 October 2017 (UTC)


 * If and only if mainstream consensus in reliable secondary sources use that wording. Otherwise it is a clear example of original research from our sides. Arnoutf (talk) 06:45, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Text under map unclear
– in Europe (green & dark grey) – in the European Union (green) – in Spain (dark & medium green)

European Union was dropped in but with or without this text is unclear. comp.arch (talk) 15:04, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

CATALONIA IS NOT SPAIN
Catalonia is not spain! Catalonia is a new country who have the capital at BARCELONA!

Official flag
The official flag of Catalonia is the File:Flag_of_Catalonia.svg:. Can someone modify the infobox?--Ssola (talk) 15:07, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Totally true. Remove the other. --Kipsde (talk) 15:33, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Please, change the flag. The official is the above mentioned one!

Small typo in need of correction
In the Independence movement (2014–present) section of the article, the last sentence reads: "On October 27th as well, the Senate of Spain is voting on instituting direct rule, via Article 155 of the Spanish Consitution." 'Constitution' is misspelled.
 * ✅, thanks. -- zzuuzz (talk) 15:43, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Request: remove nonsense link

 * Within a brief period France took full control of Catalonia, at a high economic cost for Catalonia, until it was largely reconquered by the Spanish army.

Remove the link to conquistador in the lede. This always refers to explorers of the New World / Americas / maybe the Philippines if you squint. It was just the normal Spanish army that defeated the segadors & French in that war. SnowFire (talk) 20:46, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ Black Kite (talk) 22:46, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 27 October 2017 (18) - Making links to Catalan Republic (2017)
--Sharouser (talk) 09:41, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅. I've added a link in the "Independence movement (2014–present)" section. -- zzuuzz (talk) 10:28, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 27 October 2017 (17)
This article should use dmy dates. Change it in the lead paragraph 1, section Politics paragraph 8, and cite ref. 105. Hddty. (talk) 23:41, 27 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Second this. I was going to do a sweep of all the dates. Happy to do this if/when us lesser drones can edit it.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 09:34, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ -- zzuuzz (talk) 10:50, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Name in infobox correction
The name of the political entity that decalred secession is "Catalan Republic", not "Republic of Catalonia". Also aesthetically the words in parentheses in the infobox (especially "de facto" etc) shpuld be italicized. -- Sıgehelmus  (Talk) &#124;д=)  19:57, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ -- zzuuzz (talk) 10:37, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 28 October 2017 (2)
In the lead, where the word "dispute" is there, please pipe a link to 2017 Spanish constitutional crisis. Darius robin (talk) 11:16, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ -- zzuuzz (talk) 11:23, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 27 October 2017 (1a)
Please fix WP:REFSPACE at end of first paragraph of body. thanks! --Jeremyb (talk) 14:58, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ -- zzuuzz (talk) 15:09, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Independent Catalonia
Catalonia has declared independence. I guess we need to keep updating the article ASAP.--94.234.170.148 (talk) 14:19, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 October 2017
Under Demographics the following should be changed"

What currently reads as "The Urban Region of Barcelona includes 5,217,864 people and covers an area of 2,268 km2 (876 sq mi), and about 1.7 million people live in a radius of 15 km2 (5.8 sq mi) from Barcelona."

Should have the last half of the sentence removed to read as follows "The Urban Region of Barcelona includes 5,217,864 people and covers an area of 2,268 km2 (876 sq mi)."

1) There is no citation provided about 1.7 million people within 15 km2 2) Radius is not measured in square units, thus statement is false. If 1.7 million people live in 15 km2, that would be the densest city on Earth 3) Statement is ambiguous. Do 1.7 Million people live within a radius of the center of Barcelona, or 1.7M people live within 15km of the edge of the urban region? 71.218.104.130 (talk) 21:51, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Nihlus  03:07, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 27 October 2017 (1)
"Under the Spanish constitution it an autonomous community with..." replace with "Under the Spanish constitution it is an autonomous community with..."

I noted that grammatical error and it should be fixed. 204.153.77.4 (talk) 14:53, 27 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Done. I also made a minor copyedit from "On 27 October 2017, The Catalan parliament" to "On 27 October 2017, the Catalan parliament" which technically I'm not supposed to do without consensus on a full-protected article but seems innocuous enough. Ritchie333 <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  14:56, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 27 October 2017 (2)
Please delete paragraph 6 of the introduction "On 27 October 2017, Catalonia's parliament simultaneously voted for, and declared, independence from Spain." It's just a repeat of the end of paragraph 1, including the same source. At the same time, remove the space between the full stop and the reference at the end of paragraph 1. Maswimelleu (talk) 15:01, 27 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Agreed, that is definitely superfluous and unnecessary.  Paine Ellsworth   put'r there  15:43, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Paragraph removed. -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:58, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 27 October 2017 (8)
In the second sentence, a "the" is missing before "Kingdom of Spain".

"Its constitutional status is the subject of a dispute between Kingdom of Spain which views . . ." Jdperkins (talk) 16:25, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ Mjroots (talk) 16:33, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Insulting flag
Please, change the flag. The estelada it's only a claiming flag. Goldorak (talk) 18:16, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Consensus needed for changes of this nature. Discuss, get consensus, and request again.-- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:18, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ - enough consensus and evidence on this page to support the request. Mjroots (talk) 19:26, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Finally, --Ssola (talk) 21:43, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 27 October 2017 (15)
Change map and text below map to that used in this old edit. Reason: the current infobox says "Map of Catalonia in Spain" which is a violation of WP:NPOV.

Additionally, the top of the infobox says: Catalonia Catalunya (Catalan) Catalonha (Occitan) Cataluña (Spanish) Settlement

The "Settlement" should be removed, because Catalonia is not a settlement.

<font style="font-family: Comic Sans"><font color="#CC9900">Chessrat ( talk, <font color="#ff7788">contributions ) 18:25, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Consensus needed for changes of this nature. Discuss, get consensus, and request again. -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:29, 27 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Support - The word "settlement" clearly appears out of place as the user has said it is not a single settlement such as a town or village but a larger region / territory / area etc. The word "settlement" is clearly misleading as to the nature of Catalonia and should be omitted from the info-box. Cordyceps-Zombie (talk) 18:48, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Support removing settlement - supports regions as well as settlements, which would seem to be more reasonable for this article. -- SarekOfVulcan (talk)  19:01, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Can we just delete "settlement" and leave it blank?  Vanjagenije  (talk)  19:07, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * *tests* ... looks like. -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:08, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Get rid of the term "settlement" and just leave that bit blank. Using "region" is charged as well so I think it should just be omitted. Settlement is definitely wrong. Maswimelleu (talk) 19:21, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Completely agree with Maswimelleu above; settlement is plain wrong, region would seem like siding with Spain on the independence question so isn't an NPOV. Leave it blank. - Cheers, Burwellian (Talk) 19:34, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I think there's consensus showing here to comment out (or remove outright) "settlement", so I've reactivated the request. Since I've given my opinion, someone else should make the edit. -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:30, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅. I have not changed the map, but feel free to gain consensus for a change and make another request. -- zzuuzz (talk) 17:36, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Esto da vergüenza
Cataluña es un país, todo el Govern catalán está constituido. Cataluña es aís y no una región como proclamáis aquí, aliados de los unionistas. --83.49.146.228 (talk) 12:18, 28 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Answer:

Protected edit request on 28 October 2017 (3)
Change to NYKTNE (talk) 13:24, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ -- zzuuzz (talk) 18:15, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 28 October 2017
Add Spanish as official language of the Catalan Republic in the infobox. Juridical Transition law says that the official languages remain the same. 79.148.241.20 (talk) 20:09, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Please, provide a reliable WP:source of information.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:11, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * - See explanation posted at section 17 of this talk page headed "Flag". Mjroots (talk) 20:32, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually, yes, article 24 says that official languages are "catalana, aranesa i castellana". So, ✅.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  21:25, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Language edit request
Please change "between both geographical areas Catalonia and Languedoc" to "between the geographical areas of Catalonia and Languedoc". Thanks, Rui &#39;&#39;Gabriel&#39;&#39; Correia (talk) 10:28, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  14:08, 29 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)
 * Yes check.svg Done no opposition to request &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:28, 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)
 * ✅.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  16:37, 30 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)

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  in the Geobox/settlement template (wich is deprecated:   should be used instead .)

Example:

--MrPotato1010 (talk) 15:55, 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 31 October 2017
Central European Summer Time has finished for the year so "timezone = CEST | utc_offset = +2" should be changed to "timezone = CET | utc_offset = +1". Thanks, Iggy (talk) 16:12, 31 October 2017 (UTC) Iggy (talk) 16:12, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Correct. ✅  Vanjagenije  (talk)  23:12, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

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)

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)
 * 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
 * no request. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:45, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Edit request
The first word of the second sentence of the first paragraph should be "notwithstanding".—azuki (talk · contribs · email) 01:41, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:21, 2 November 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)
 * Get consensus for the wording first, then submit it. -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:55, 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)
 * ❌. That is certainly not vandalism. See the deffinition of vandalism here: WP:VANDALISM.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  14:20, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

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. - 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)

Infobox change
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)

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)


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


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

In terms of NPOV, perhaps the Donetsk People's Republic infobox 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 [[Image:BallenaBlanca.jpg|25px]] [[Image:Mars symbol (bold blue).svg|12px]] (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, and . 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. <font style="color:#630B57;background:#FFFFFF;">Mr. <font style="color:#FFFFFF;background:#630B57;">McCloud 15:06, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * 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)

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)

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)
 * 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)

❌ 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.

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)
 * This is disputed. Please seek consensus for this change. -- zzuuzz (talk) 15:17, 27 October 2017 (UTC)


 * 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)
 * 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)

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 (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)
 * 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)
 * 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
 * Consensus needed for changes of this nature. Discuss, get consensus, and request again.-- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:18, 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)
 * 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)

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)
 * There is nothing we here can do about other language versions of Wikipedia. -- zzuuzz (talk) 10:42, 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)
 * ❌. 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)

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)

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)

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)
 * There is no consensus yet. But the lead should be updated soon anyway, as it is out of date, and therefore inaccurate. Coldcreation (talk) 03:37, 31 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)

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)
 * ❌. 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)


 * 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)

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.
 * ❌. 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)

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. &spades;PMC&spades; (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)
 * 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.


 * Support since there have been many changes that do not reflect the truth, i suggest to revert back to version https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&oldid=806894786 from 24 October 2017‎ which is neutral and from there add in section 2.8 History/Independence movement (2014–present) the recent events from friday [1] and today [2]


 * [1] friday: the catalan regional parliament voted to declare independence from spain, while the spanish parliament approved direct rule over the region (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-41780116)
 * [2] monday: the catalan regional parliament has been formally dissolved and that its speaker will be leading a transitional committee of lawmakers until a regional election is held on Dec. 21 (https://www.apnews.com/ab6cd0d089594e09bd9da5b3bef8cab0)


 * other relevant sources:


 * Spain seeks rebellion charges against fired Catalan leaders
 * https://apnews.com/af2fcce3a4d44971bf29bb24b20f0d84


 * Catalan leader Carles Puigdemont has fled the country amid rebellion charges
 * http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/catalonia-leader-carles-puigdemont-left-spain-brussels-rebellion-charges-eu-independence-latest-a8027366.html


 * catalonia is under government control, there is no such thing as a "catalonian republic" since those imposing and pushing for independence have no control over anything, and their political parties will participate in the spanish regional elections on Dec. 21, which acknowledges it's an autonomous region of spain. also, the regional parliament has been officially dissolved. WakiWiki (talk) 19:16, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Support page returning as it was before the independence declaration. I think it is obvious this can no longer be considered as a state in any form, because of the following. There is no sign at all an effective independence has been enforced (much to the contrary), and by all means and purposes Catalonia still remains under effective Spanish control. While I may agree that in some cases, this by itself would not be enough to say a state has been disestablished, all other circumstances, coupled with the fact that the pro-independence leader has fled the country, and taking sources that do indeed affirm that Rajoy's and Spanish strategy has prevailed, we've little evidence to keep this working as if it was still a disputed territory. Rather, this is pretty much over (at least from an administrative point of view). Impru20 (talk) 20:19, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * 1) Things are working as normal throughout Catalonia, as if no independence declaration had ever took place. There is little (if any) opposition to direct rule from Madrid. No act has been made from any Catalan authority to try to enforce a state-like appearance. Authorities are not acting as if they were a separate state. Catalonia is not working as a separate state.
 * 2) Its parliament was dissolved by the Spanish government in order to call a regional election. Instead of rejecting it, Parliament speaker Carme Forcadell, one of the most prominent pro-independence figures as well as the Catalan authority in charge of most parliamentary functions, has acknowledged that the Parliament of Catalonia was dissolved.
 * 3) Pro-independence parties have accepted to contest the regional election, despite knowing it is a regional election not called by them, but by Spanish authorities, and thus under Spanish law and constitution.
 * 4) Pro-independence parties in the Spanish Cortes Generales have so far refused to vacate their seats.
 * 5) The Mossos d'Escuadra have been put under Spanish control since 28 October and do not recognize the authority of Puigdemont's cabinet.
 * 6) Puigdemont and part of his cabinet, which would be the ones supposedly in charge of the Republic, have fled to Belgium amid reports that they may seek political asylum.


 * Support restoring the beginning the beginning of the lead as it was before the independence declaration but without deleting the declaration. I agree with the arguments made by . I would however also include in the lead at least for now, after the description as a Spanish autonomous region, the fact that the declaration took place and that with 70 votes the parliament declared itself independent. Cataluña could be used as an example. The current wording in our English project does not respect WP:NPOV as it presents in equal terms both interpretations while in truth most sources still regard Catalonia as a Spanish region as so do all major nations and supranational bodies. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 21:03, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * proposal also makes sense.--Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 21:06, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Support restoring the lead and the infobox as it was before the independence declaration which had no effect on the real situation on the ground. The article should reflect the realities of the administrative status which also corresponds with the de jure status of the region.Zello (talk) 22:25, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Support restoring the lead to the October 24 version, as per above. None of the events yet justify inclusion in the lead. power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 17:34, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 31 October 2017
Based on the information posted on sections and  there seems to be a consensus that the current wording of the first paragraph of the lead is no longer valid. Based on that discussion I propose the following text based on this stable version as proposed above:

Catalonia (Catalunya, Catalonha, Cataluña) is an autonomous community of Spain located on the northeastern extremity of the Iberian Peninsula. It is designated as a nationality by its Statute of Autonomy. None-withstanding, the Generalitat de Catalunya views it as an independent republic following a unilateral declaration of independence from Spain 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.

This can be a starting point to at least correct the "disputed territory" claim which is, in my opinion and specially after the latest develoments, a case of original research. Please feel free to change the wording. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 18:19, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I endorse the above request. ToThAc (talk) 18:23, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Endorse as a starting point, though this should eventually revert back mostly to its version before the independence declaration (with updates to reflect such events happened, of course). Impru20 (talk) 23:15, 31 October 2017 (UTC)


 * ✅. I can see strong consensus for this (not only in this section, but also above), so I made the edit.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  23:19, 31 October 2017 (UTC)


 * The BBC source title Catalan parliament declares independence from Spain is not the title at the link. The correct title is Catalans declare independence as Madrid imposes direct rule. It should be mentioned in the lead that "the Spanish parliament has approved direct rule over the region, following the declaration of independence". Coldcreation (talk) 00:18, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅. The title has been changed. See this archived version. Anyway, I changed the title.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  16:13, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Proposed changes to infobox
The central government of Spain has taken control of Catalonia without much resistance (see here), and there are no media reports that suggest that the Catalan Republic exists as a functional entity. Thus I am proposing that the infobox move information on the current Spanish authorities above information on the Catalan Republic. I feel that this change will better reflect the facts that currently exist on the ground. --Dial (talk) 00:28, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 1 November 2017
This page needs urgent restoration of the infobox. Many users said it and the admin who is mostly watching for this pages it's mainly saying to seek "consensus" yet 2 users deleted the infobox which was here for years without asking anyone or without any kind of consensus. Those 2 users deleted the old infobox just 1 minute before the page went fully vandalized, so no one could revert those changes ...


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&diff=807369754&oldid=807369526 (145,238 bytes) (-2,885)‎ . . (Disputed territory infobox)
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalonia&diff=807369877&oldid=807369754 (144,204 bytes) (-1,034)‎ . . (rewritten lead paragraph to include udi)

Without consensus and without the permit of anyone, those 2 users deleted the infobox which had years on this page. Years !! People were changing the infobox to put the recent events during 27th October. More than 2 dozens of edits were maded in the infobox and no one changed or deleted it, just putting new events. Besides the 1st user user did it without the consensus of anyone and putting false information. The 2nd user as well deleted many data on the article.

The admin replying most of the requests is saying "not done, reach consensus" yet no one realized yet that those 2 users deleted lots of information and made a false infobox (Catalonia is NOT a disputed territory, that's Abkhazia or Transnistria, not Catalonia) just 1 minute before the full protection of this page, and no one reverted their changes ... Where was the consensus for their changes? I see that many others said the same as me. I hope that Vangajenije or any admin will see this and look at the history in the page of Catalonia to see what really happened. Anyways, yesterday the independence declaration went fully suspended and the own Catalonian government accepted it. I'm putting an US source, The Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.es/2017/10/31/suspendida-la-declaracion-de-independencia-de-cataluna_a_23262184/ --TechnicianGB (talk) 15:20, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Support. Current discussions in talk seem to be heavily in favour of restoration of the infobox previous to these two edits, and current events and sources show that control over Catalan territory is currently not disputed at all. I'm not going to repeat myself over arguments already explained in previous discussion in this talk, but it's clear there's no consensus at all for the current infobox. Impru20 (talk) 16:07, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Support. It is indeed embarrassing for Wikipedia to let such an important page linger in the alternative reality so long.Zello (talk) 19:47, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅. I can see consensus (here and above) to revert the infobox to the version before the declaration of independence. The infobox was changed with no consensus in the first place (as I already mentioned here). I'm reverting it now.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:43, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Goodness me, just three people is enough to have this page changed to the way it is now, 100% reflecting the Spanish propagandist side and no longer stating that its status is disputed? Is this even real, or is this supposed to be a joke? This is supposed to be a digital encyclopaedia, not a right-wing/Spanish propaganda journal. This needs to be returned to how it was, saying that its status is disputed, can someone with the seniority/editing privileges please do this?? *Violet* 60.242.34.100 (talk) 06:31, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * There are no sides the article reflects what the reliable sources state with WP:NPOV and WP:DUEWEIGHT. Do you have reliable sources that state that the status of Catalonia is disputed? You may be interested in reading this source Catalonia independence declaration was symbolic, says Carme Forcadell where "The speaker of the defunct Catalan parliament dismissed its declaration of independence as symbolic". --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 08:32, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * The defense of Forcadell is claiming that the declaration did not have any legal effects and they are presenting the document from the session on 27 October as proof: La Mesa del Parlament hizo constar en acta que la DUI no tenía efectos jurídicos. This was not disclosed at that time and it contradicts their words and attitude at the time but it seems clear that they knew it would have no legal effect. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 17:47, 13 November 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)
 * 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 (Catalunya, Catalonha, 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).


 * 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.

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. <b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(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. <b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(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)

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. -- Brown HairedGirl (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. <b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  15:11, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Category:States and territories established in 2017
I added Category:States and territories established in 2017 using HOTCAT, not realising 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)
 * - 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. -- Brown HairedGirl (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 and : 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, . --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)

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. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:57, 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)

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)

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)

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)

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)


 * 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 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)

"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)

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

Spain obviously has not only de jure but also de facto control over the region after the former government fled. The infobox and the lead shoud be restored to reflect the reality of the situation.Zello (talk) 19:20, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Carlos in exile
Carlos Puidgemont is in exile. Does he still claim to be President? If he is, then he should be referred to as (in-exile) if he is still excercising power. He is yet to constitute a government in-exile though (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/30/spanish-prosecutor-calls-for-rebellion-charges-against-catalan-leaders). MonsterHunter32 (talk) 22:22, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Are the different language Wikipedias supposed to agree?
Viquipèdia: "Catalunya (Cataluña en castellà, Catalonha en occità) és un país[2] europeu situat a la Mediterrània occidental." (PeacePeace (talk) 17:24, 31 October 2017 (UTC))
 * The answer is: No.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  17:25, 31 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)


 * Do you have some reliable sources which negate the multitude of sources (regarded as reliable) which all say that the autonomy has been stripped? Do you have some reason for keeping an undated present tense on a fluid changeable situation? (PeacePeace (talk) 17:29, 31 October 2017 (UTC))

Second highest mountain is not Puigpedrós but Pic Verdaguer
The second highest peak in Catalonia is Pic Verdaguer (3129.4m) instead of Puigpedrós (2912.6m) -that is the 31st highest peak of Catalonia-
 * Please, provide a wp:reliable source.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  23:21, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Pic Verdaguer is only a shoulder of Pica d'Estats (the highest mountain of Catalonia) rather than an independent mountain, thus I would not describe it as the "second highest mountain". See this annotated photo. Zach (Talk) 14:23, 1 November 2017 (UTC)