Talk:Last use of capital punishment in Spain

However
"The executed men's families claimed they were denied access to their graves in the village graveyard and scuffles with police took place., Gustavo Catalán Deus, a photographer who witnessed the burials, said that some family members had been present, together with police, members of the military and lawyers."

What does the word "however" actually add here? See also WP:EDITORIAL. --John (talk) 22:37, 9 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Hello, John. As I said in the edit summary, it's perfectly standard in written English to include discourse markers in the form of adverbs of contrast or purpose. For example "though it was snowing, I went out wearing a t-shirt and shorts." You could say that without the "though" the contrast is still evident, but that isn't the standard way. In the case above, the however, does highlight the fact that there is a contrast between what the two groups claim about who was present, otherwise I do feel that would be lost.


 * Also, (and please don't take offence at this) while I appreciate you taking the time to do the copyedit, I did feel that a lot of it, rather than correct mistakes, which is the usual purpose of a copyedit, was simply swapping one perfectly valid form for another perfectly valid form. Future in the past for past simple, however for but, protestors for protesters (both valid spellings) or "a number of" for "several." In the latter case, in particular, several is usually defined as "more than two but not many" and I seriously question whether 15 countries is "not many." Also is "In Britain the governing British Labour Party" really better than "The governing British Labour Party" ? Is there another Labour party that governs Britain? :) I dunno, but I usually take the view that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Per, Muphry's law, I guarantee I have a typo in the above! Valenciano (talk) 12:11, 10 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Some of these things can be valid choices with valid arguments on both sides, you're right. WP:EDITORIAL recommends using "however" with extreme care and I agree with this advice. In this case I think it better to do without the word as it is unhelpful editorialising. The Labour party one was my mistake. If the number is fifteen, wouldn't it be better to say "fifteen" rather than the vague, hand-waving, I-couldn't-be-bothered-to-do-my-research "a number of"? Zero is a number, and so is pi, and so is negative nine. I would value other opinions on this as I already saw your preferences from your reverting in the editorial "however" and your edit summary. --John (talk) 17:38, 10 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Fair point about the numbers, though that wasn't down to lack of research as they are listed. Your change to 15 is better and also, thanks for delinking the countries, which I shouldn't have linked per MOS. As I said, I did think that the however was necessary, but I'm open to alternative wording. Valenciano (talk) 18:36, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

ambiguous why the executions were protested
were the protests, withdrawal of ambassadors, etc over 1) the death penalty in general, or 2) due to support for these particular prisoners and/or doubts about the legitimacy of these particular trials and/or disagreement with the suppression of this particular political position? Or both? The article (which is linked on the wikipedia front page today) doesnt seem clear to me. In discussing how the death penalty's use in Spain was falling out of favor in the 1960s, or the Pope's call for clemency, it seems like 1). In discussing the contemporary govt's re-opening the case, finding irregularities in the trial, compensating the victims families for the violations of the victims' right to a fair trial, it seems like 2).Snarfblaat (talk) 17:15, 10 September 2015 (UTC)


 * It's actually more a case of 3): the Franco government, as Europe's last right-wing dictatorship was unpopular among the more left wing and social democratic governments in the post-war period and by the 1970s in particular was an anachronistic throwback to the fascist dictatorships of the 30s. Franco, although neutral in World war 2, was definitely seen as more pro-Hitler than neutral. 2) was true to a limited extent. There was international sympathy for ETA in the early period due to them being one of the only opponents actively fighting Franco in Spain.


 * Thanks for bringing that up, I'll have a look, probably within the next seven days and add some sources. Valenciano (talk) 19:14, 10 September 2015 (UTC)


 * @, sorry, took much longer than expected before I could get around to that. I've added some context now, have a look and see if that answers your question. Valenciano (talk) 20:06, 4 October 2015 (UTC)