Talk:List of prime ministers of Spain

Untitled
Proposal to move to List of Presidents of the Government of Spain or List of Prime Ministers of Spain:

Over-literal translation of presidente del gobierno. Needs to be moved to List of Prime Ministers of Spain. &mdash; Chameleon 17:47, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't have strong feelings either way on this one, --SqueakBox 18:42, May 19, 2005 (UTC)

Prime Minister of the Government is just ridiculous and even worse than the literal President of the Government. &mdash;Cantus… &#9742;   08:02, May 20, 2005 (UTC)

I've moved to the more correct "President of the Spanish government," which is a literal translation of the Spanish "Presidente del gobierno espa&ntilde;ol". &mdash;Cantus… &#9742;   08:11, May 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * What makes you think that a literal translation favouring the use of false cognates is more correct? &mdash; Chameleon 10:18, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * We're not dealing with false cognates here. —Cantus&hellip; &#9742;   12:31, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes we are. Presidente only means "president" when it refers to a head of state.  Its primary meaning is "chairman", the presidente del gobierno being the chairman of the government &mdash; i.e. the Prime Minister.  &mdash; Chameleon 12:51, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * President doesn't just mean head of state. Consider, for example, the use of president with regard to companies or universities. Jadedmaidn 21:18, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

List of Prime Ministers of Spain
The heads of government of Spain have only been "presidents of the government" (del gobierno) since Franco. From 1834 up to Franco they were "presidents of the council of ministers" (del consejo de ministros). I think the normal English rendering for both of these would be "prime minister". IMHO the title should be List of Prime Ministers of Spain, with redirects from the formal titles. Compare List of Prime Ministers of Italy (their official title is "president of the council of ministers"), and List of Prime Ministers of France (they were also "presidents of the council of ministers" until 1959). --Cam 21:16, Jun 11, 2005 (UTC)


 * Indeed. &mdash; Chameleon 22:00, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Now fixed.
 * James F. (talk) 10:02, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

acting
What does "acting" mean here? --euyyn 18:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Mistake

There is a mistake, with the colours of the Presidents. Niceto Alcalá-Zamora y Torres has got red, and Manuel Azaña Díaz has blue. Felipe González and José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero have got red, and José María Aznar, blue. These colours aren`t true. Niceto Alcalá-Zamora wasn`t socialist, and Manuel Azaña wasn`t like José María Aznar. Azaña was socialist, and Aznar isn`t socialist. Alcalá-Zamora wasn`t socialist; he is oh right.

Table layout
I seem to be engaged in a low-intensity edit war with people trying to wreck the table layout of this page. In particular, the edits performed by 94.189.172.94 have been fine and improved the article until User:Onetimeonly came and messed the layout (removing all pictures, changing the alignment, etc). However, the IP user continued editing based on that mess, so when I noticed it I had to revert the whole bundle from Onetimeonly's edits. The IP user seemed to think that his contributions were being smashed too, and so he re-reverted, but that is not the case: his changes were perfectly fine, and so I am asking him to perform them again on the version with the right table layout. On the table layout itself, I will only say it can be changed, sure, but the new version is way uglier and less informative. Also, the timeline was removed without reason, etc. If the changes make sense (or, even if they don't, if more people want it the ugly way, I will step aside, for I am no watchdog, but until then I consider that such a big change merits discussion. For that matter, I am performing one reversion more. However, should the table dance continue without discussion, I will request semi-protection of this page. Habbit (talk) 21:05, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Once again, I reiterate my opinion that the change in layout that User:Mahalios is trying to impose, while legitimate, requires at least a bit of consensus. In particular, I'd like to start by discussing the following matters regarding the proposed modifications:
 * Why should the PM pictures be removed? They provide valuable at-a-glance identification of individuals, and also usually allows distinguishing longer-lived or "more important" PMs (which will tend to have pictures available) from those who don't. If your objection is their size, they can be made smaller
 * Why should cells be left-aligned? I would agree to change the alignment of the "Name" cell, but all others, and particularly the dates, should be either centered or right-aligned in order to be able to glance at years fast.
 * Why should the "Democratic Spain" timeline be removed? I think it is pretty informative and it seems to be just a "collateral damage" of the edit warring here.
 * Note that these are not my only objections, but it would be good to start with them. Habbit (talk) 21:41, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
 * After one day without response on User:Mahalios's part, I have restored the old table layout and merged his content changes into it - adding the PoliticsES template and improving the FET-JONS translation. I once again call on you to discuss the changes to the table layout, particularly the three points mentioned above (removal of pictures and timelines, change of global alignment). I think I am displaying quite a big bunch of good faith, but if this reversion war continues, I am ready to go to WP:AN/I. Habbit (talk) 18:28, 6 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I have to agree with Habbit here, the unexplained removal of content from the article is not acceptable. I can only assume the users involved are pureists and don't like the article to contain anything but bare facts. While such an opinion is perfectly acceptable, an edit summary or an explanaiton on the talk page is still required. Discussion instead of an edit war would be the better choice but the current form of unexplained vandalism is certainly not acceptable! EA210269 (talk) 23:33, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Third opinion
Hi

I've removed this dispute from WP:3O because (a) it appears that more than two editors are involved, and (b) one of the parties to the dispute has been indefinitely blocked for abusing multiple accounts.

At this point I'm going to assume that Mahalios is unrelated to Onlyonetime. Mahlios, you do need to discuss you changes - ideally here. Until you do so no one else has any idea why you want to remove content, and it becomes increasingly difficult to continue assuming good faith, i.e. that you're not editing editing disruptively or with a partisan slant.

At present there appears to be a consensus for leaving the article as it is. I'm prepared to revisit this conclusion if/when Mahalios provides an explanation, but until then I believe that the disputed content should stay.

Cheers, This flag once was red propagandadeeds 03:50, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Juan Bravo Murillo
This article has Juan Bravo Murillo taking office in January 1850. I am currently translating the article on Bravo Murillo from the Spanish Wikipedia, which gives a date a year later. I suspect that they are correct and this list is wrong in this respect. - Jmabel | Talk 19:42, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
 * http://www.la-moncloa.es/Presidente/RelacionPresidentes/RelacionHistorica/1846-1853.htm backs me up. That seems solid enough that I will make the correction. - Jmabel | Talk 20:01, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Here's the text of the royal decree of 14 January 1851, naming Bravo Murillo prime minister (no. 50 on linked page).--Cam (talk) 05:37, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Mistakes or lack of neutrality
The use of the term Primer Ministro or Prime Minister is the way that PSOE former president, Jose Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, refers himselft when acting. The fact is that no other president uses that british way of address himself. In fact, the King appoints Ministers in a Cabinet -the Goverment- and one of them act as the President of the Cabinet of Ministers in their meetings, leading them all. He is call Presidente del Gobierno. So there is a president and is not a republic. For example, this video was taken in 1981. In spanish. []

In the timeline, when talking abount Pi y Margall period -1873-, there are references to events out of date or not relevant. For example, commonwealth of catalonina references makes a citation to a 1911 event, wich is out of date and not relevant in 1873. Citation of Seville canton -an event of few days- is not as relevant as Cartagena's one, not mentioned, due to the relevant fact that it was a naval station, leading to civil war for more than a year. So it was a war, something important to say, and the catalonian commonwealth and Seville canton has nothing to do with it. But it's a way to make important a fact that didn't or even that didn't not happen in that moment.

When talking about wars, I mean, when talking about we can deduce, reading this article, to be the most important war ever in Spanish History, the Iraq War, cause no other are mentioned, there are several important mistakes.

First, there are two Iraq Wars. It is supposed to talk about the second one. But if Iraq Wars are so much important to Spanish History and relevant in the list of Spanish Presidents, a reference to the first one must be done. You can also reference to conscripts sent to that one in times of Felipe González Márquez as President and Narcís Serra as Minister of Defense. It was October 31th of 1990.[] [] (Both in spanish). Deployment included musical concerts on board warships. Video []. No comment.

Second, what ever you want to call USA intervention on Iraq (intervention, war, ...), there was no Spanish soldier of the war while. There was later on, in the period of ocupation of Iraq, once Saddam Hussein regimen was deposed. So Aznar do not sent any soldier to the Iraq War, not the first one neither the second one.

And speaking of wars, there were battles that brought down the entire government and ushered in the dictatorship of Primo de Rivera. But that should be unimportant. []

This are all mistakes, but all together, it seams paragraphs of PSOE political program and rebuttals.

By the way. It's very interesting the influence of murder in polls for presidents in Spain. The list is large and much are shown. They are five [], four of them in -more or less- democratic period: General Juan Prim y Prats [], Antonio Cánovas del Castillo [], José Canalejas y Méndez [], Eduardo Dato e Iradier [] and the later and not democratic elected - but not less murdered - Luis Carrero Blanco []. But as I talk about the influence of murder in polls, José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero election must be included. [] []

Missing Prime Minsters

 * Fidel Dávila Arrondo
 * Francisco Gómez-Jordana Sousa

AHC300 (talk) 11:36, 19 February 2017 (UTC)


 * I replied to you in your talk. Impru20 (talk) 12:32, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Rajoy's term end date
Please, may someone who knows about law decide which source is more valid to determine when Mariano Rajoy's term ended? According to the Spanish Constitution (Art. 101) and the date the BOE published the Royal Decrees dismissing Rajoy and appointing Sánchez as Prime Minister, it should have ended on June 2, not on June 1: Art. 101 El Gobierno cesa tras la celebración de elecciones generales, en los casos de pérdida de la confianza parlamentaria previstos en la Constitución, o por dimisión o fallecimiento de su Presidente.

El Gobierno cesante continuará en funciones hasta la toma de posesión del nuevo Gobierno.

(TRANSLATION: 1. The Government shall resign after the holding of general elections, in the event of loss of Parliamentary confidence as provided in the Constitution, or on account of the resignation or death of the President. 2. THE OUTGOING GOVERNMENT SHALL CONTINUE IN POWER UNTIL THE NEW GOVERNMENT TAKES OFFICE).

https://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2018/06/02/

However, one user hinders me from making the change (June 2 is stated as the date Rajoy's term ended in all other Wikipedias, although I know different-language Wikipedias are independent from each other) and insists on using a chart which appears in LaMoncloa's official website as a legal criterion to determine the date. However, LaMoncloa's website is not a legal source and that chart's data may have even been extracted from Wikipedia itself - workers who are in charge of the page are obviously not lawyers and their main job is to design a beautiful website with useful information and news about the Government, but it is not their aim to specify and solve subtle legal questions of this kind. Thank you and sorry for insisting. I just would like you to understand that the sources that are being used to support that date are not legally valid.

Rajoy's term ended on June 2, not on June 1. It specifically ended when Sánchez became Prime Minister. There cannot be a power vacuum between both days (Pedro Sánchez's term is already said to begin on June 2). The Royal Decrees published in the Official Diary of the State were signed on June 1, but were published the following day, and therefore did not come into force until that same day. The day the decree was signed has no legal validity. Please check how the Decree which made Rajoy Prime Minister in 2011 was also signed one day before it came into force - it was signed on December 20, the day he was elected by the Congress of Deputies, but Rajoy only became Prime Minister one day later, when the Decree was published and he was sworn in. This same article states that his first term began on December 21, so there is an obvious contradiction between both dates, because two different criteria are being followed. I can guarantee you that the correct criterium is the 21 December - 2 June one, which is the one that has been followed to fix the date Rajoy's term began and also to establish the dates when former Spanish Prime Ministers began and finished their terms. Thanks a lot for your attention. Check: http://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2011/12/21/pdfs/BOE-A-2011-19861.pdf

Besides:

http://cadenaser.com/ser/2018/06/02/politica/1527924001_915647.html

LA SER: El Boletín Oficial del Estado publica este sábado los tres Reales Decretos que oficializan el relevo al frente del Gobierno. El primero de ellos es el que nombra como presidente a Pedro Sánchez. Los otros dos recogen el cese de Mariano Rajoy y de todos sus ministros.

Para evitar cualquier vacío de poder, el artículo 101.2 de la Constitución establece "El Gobierno cesante continuará en funciones hasta la toma de posesión del nuevo Gobierno". Como Pedro Sánchez ha tomado posesión este sábado, Mariano Rajoy ha sido muy pocas horas presidente en funciones. It literally says that, in order to avoid a power vacuum, the Constitution establishes that the outgoing Government shall continue in office until the new Government is sworn in. So, since Pedro Sánchez has taken office on Saturday, Mariano Rajoy has been the acting Prime Minister only for a few hours. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.156.8.194 (talk) 17:12, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
 * There is already a discussion focused at Reliable sources/Noticeboard, where the current discussion has moved and where other users are giving their input. Aside from the petition of refraining from synthesising information, I must also ask you to please refrain from indiscriminately copy-pasting your contents throughout Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a forum. Respect Wikipedia's procedures to reach consensus and refrain from unconstructive edits, such as flooding numerous talk pages with walls of mostly irrelevant text.  Impru20 talk 17:18, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Please keep quiet until others express their opinion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.156.8.194 (talk) 17:56, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
 * You might want to read WP:FORUMSHOP.Slatersteven (talk) 18:37, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Answer to the OP, copied from RSN:

"All of what you're saying might be true (I'm no expert on the matter), but it lacks a source which directly supports your statement, and thus appears to be your own conclusion. Finding a WP:RS (or actually, multiple ones) which gives the end of Rajoy's term as being on the 2nd of June would be a better start than arguing this based on the text of the law."
 * 198.84.253.202 (talk) 20:54, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Timeline prime Ministers of Spain
The graphic showing when Prime minister Gonzalez was in duty is wrong. It shows in a blue timeline showing he was prime minister between 1996 and 2004. This was Aznar, his is also wrong 178.145.243.66 (talk) 07:18, 19 January 2023 (UTC)


 * No, the timeline is correct. The name corresponds with the bar on the left, not the one beneath. TheRichic Escudo de España (mazonado).svg  (Messages here)  11:15, 19 January 2023 (UTC)