User talk:Impru20/Archive 8

CDC
Hi CDC has been replaced by PDeCAT but there are no source that CDC has been dissolved. The party have not any activity but still exit. --Panam2014 (talk) 13:31, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Yep, we are in the same case than Our Ukraine (political party) or Democratic Party (Japan). But sources does not talk about dissolution. --Panam2014 (talk) 13:44, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
 * In that case, please replace "Dissolved" by "defunct" in the infobox. --Panam2014 (talk) 13:53, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I think we could add special items like for others infobox "1blankname/1namedata" or adding a parenthesis and a note. --Panam2014 (talk) 14:19, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I am agree. --Panam2014 (talk) 14:26, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Have you got sources about deputies who has been registrated as members of PDeCAT, CDC and independents ? --Panam2014 (talk) 17:55, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I think we should consider that there are 13 PDeCAT, and we should reintegrate Elsa only if there are source who said that she is now again member of the party. We could add that in the articles. --Panam2014 (talk) 18:52, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Democratic Party (Japan)
Hi Why did you wrote that the party has been merged ? --Panam2014 (talk) 17:51, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

PDeCAT
Hi Are you agree if I add the number of JuntxCat deputies who are members from PDeCAT ? --Panam2014 (talk) 13:35, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Catalunya en Comú/meta/shortname
Template:Catalunya en Comú/meta/shortname has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 17:42, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Parliament of Catalonia
Slow down, Hoss--I was busy reverting but you jumped in: you certainly don't need to be reverting any more. Remember, it takes two to edit-war, and edit warring is edit warring even if you're right. Next time, leave it be and file at WP:ANEW, OK? Drmies (talk) 20:32, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * OK, they did it again but I gotta get out of here--can you file at WP:ANEW if some nice admin hasn't blocked them yet? Thanks, Drmies (talk) 20:37, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Coalition graph
Hi Impru! In the article Opinion polling for the Italian general election, 2018, a user upload a graph about the opinion polls for coalitions; I must admit that his graph isn't as so "good" as yours, so if you want create a graph for coalitions, it will be great! Thank you so much :) -- Nick.mon (talk) 17:15, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
 * +1 – if it isn't too much trouble and you've got some extra time on your hands it'd be nice if you could make one, though I realize that you've probably also got other priorities on Wikipedia at the moment. Mélencron (talk) 19:11, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Coalition graph is NOT up to date - please update or remove
You keep adding an old graph in the page Opinion polling for the Italian general election, 2018, claiming that it plots data "poll results from 25 February 2013 to the present day". This is incorrect, since the data displayed is only until mid-December. So please update the graph with the latest results, or until then Wikipedia should not report wrong claims. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.0.109.81 (talk) 09:58, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Category:First Secretaries of the Parliament of Catalonia
The "First Secretary of the Parliament of Catalonia" is not the "First Secretary of the Partit dels Socialistes de Catalunya". Correct your foolish mistake.--Obi2canibe (talk) 22:44, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Ángel Gabilondo


The article Ángel Gabilondo has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp/dated tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one.  JTP (talk • contribs) 01:38, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 17
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Spanish local elections, 2007, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Torrent and Las Rozas ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Spanish_local_elections%2C_2007 check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Spanish_local_elections%2C_2007?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:44, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Italian general election of 2001
Hi, ehm... were is the discussion in which it was decided to eliminate the third position in the page Italian general election, 2001?--Wololoo (talk) 15:13, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Sorting for Spanish polls
You have been doing a lot of great work for the articles related to party politics in Spain and its regions. There is just one thing missing, though, on the article on opinion polling in Spain, namely that it is not possible to sort the table by pollster. As you know pollsters may widely differ, because of the polling method, the wording, and so on.

I have spent a few hours to make it work. The results are very good, in my opinion: take a look at my sandbox page. Once you sort by pollster, you can best observe the trends of Ciudadanos and PP.

You may frown at the creation of a 'Source' column out of the 'Polling firm/Commissionner' column. However, I had no choice. The sorting doesn't work properly when there is a reference number inside the cell, for instance 'Celeste-Tel/eldiario.es [123]'. I also had to remove the "p" reference group, so as to gain space. It could be possible, for aesthetical reasons, to move the Source column further to the right, with the Visual Editor, in order to get a table somewhat like on the Swedish Wikipedia.

Another change is that I added a 'data-sort-value' attribute on each of the date cells, to make the sorting work seamlessly.

If it is perfect, feel free to copypaste. Otherwise, I am eager to receive your feedback.

Kahlores (talk) 19:24, 23 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi! Ok, I've taken a look at your suggestion and chose to do some tweaking myself to make it work properly. While I've known about the sortability function for a while, I was not a big fan of it because it affected the table's mechanics (i.e. increasing each sortable column's width beyond its established one; the issue you mention about references and so on). However, it seems a lot of people find it useful and it looks like the trend nowadays is to make these tables sortable by pollster and date, so it's ok.
 * Nonetheless, I had to make some tweaking to your proposal: firstly, you indeed guessed out correctly that I'd frown at the idea of creating a separate "Sources" column (not only because it'd be a break in consistency with all other opinion polling tables in other articles for Spanish general/regional/local elections, but also because you won't always be able to properly fit this into the table; specifically if polls report a large number of parties and the table is too wide). However, by using the 'data-sort-value' attribute also on the "polling firm" cells, I've essentially added the sortability function into these two columns while preserving the table's overall shape (I've also managed to get it so that you can return it to normal after sorting it by pollster).
 * The change can now be seen right here; hope it works as intended.
 * Cheers! Impru20 (talk) 21:03, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
 * The change can now be seen right here; hope it works as intended.
 * Cheers! Impru20 (talk) 21:03, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Cheers! Impru20 (talk) 21:03, 23 March 2018 (UTC)


 * My intention was to have a sortable table and now we have it. The 'Source' column was only a workaround.
 * The only thing I would suggest would be to remove the space-taking "group="p"" attribute (which could be done in less than a minute with an editor), whose utility seems very obscure to me.
 * Many thanks.
 * Kahlores (talk) 21:48, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

United Kingdom European Union membership referendum, 2016
There is a (fairly pointless) discussion on the article's talk page about the template (where you can see who the owner of all the IPs is). Could you keep an eye on all the other UK referendum articles as he's reverting across all of them. I was thinking about asking them all to be semi-protected, but last time I did that, he logged into his account and edited that way instead. Cheers, Number   5  7  11:30, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Italian opinion polls
Hi Impru20, when you have some free time, could you complete the graph about the 2018 election’s polls and start the one about the next election? Thank you so much :) -- Nick.mon (talk) 06:38, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Burka Ban Map
Hi Impru20 firstly thank you for doing the graph on the Italian opinion polls. I am just wondering do you know how to do map's on wikipeaida? Leftwinguy92 (talk) 13:23, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Catalan Parliament
Hi, I would like to apologize about the edit I made about the Main Opposition and Other Opposition, I read and found out that there is no such thing as Main or Other Opposition. I hope that our disagreement didn’t cause anything to happen. --Pizzalover12 (talk) 14:02, 27 May 2018 Pizzalover12 (talk) 18:02, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

It appears as though I need to notify you of this


I bona nit i bona hora. CodeInconnu (talk) 19:05, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

I need to notify you of this
A username, his/her obssession with a political party, his/her indefinite block, a suggestion to run a cross pattern of contributions with another user here and take the later along some diffs here. Regards.--Asqueladd (talk) 16:15, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Leader of the Oppositon of Spain
Just to clarify: I didn't remove the office of Leader of the Opposition, that I too think is important, I merely placed the office of Secretary General of the PSOE above of it, since it is an office in which Pedro Sánchez is still an incumbent, and, if I may add, one is exclusively dependant on the other. M. Armando (talk) 16:17, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Vector map
Hi there,

I've created a vector version of the map that is being used for Spanish elections.

Please let me know if you have any feedback on it.

Many thanks

--RaviC (talk) 10:29, 2 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Ok, I've created a version with a colour scheme. --RaviC (talk) 12:25, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Rajoy's end of term
I'm not re-interpreting the legal sources, but following valid legal criteria - the same that have been followed with former Spanish Prime Ministers - to determine when Rajoy's term ended. Please read this message. Thanks a lot for your attention and sorry for the inconvenience.

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. 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 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.156.8.194 (talk) 12:04, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Una cosilla sobre traducciones
Buenas, Impru. Viendo el artículo del gobierno de Pedro Sánchez me ha llamado la atención la traducción de lo que creo que es "formación profesional" como "vocational training". No puedo más que preguntarme de dónde sale está traducción tan, no sé, extraña. Un saludo y gracias por tus aportaciones. Asturkian (talk) 11:22, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Ana Pastor
Hi Why did you color Pastor in grey in the PP leadership election ? --Panam2014 (talk) 00:08, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Pastor is considered as an independent politician. --Panam2014 (talk) 16:08, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Here. Cifuentes not Pastor. --Panam2014 (talk) 16:16, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

PSOE logo
I appreciate you've taken the decision to temporarily undo my edits. However, the logo is not copyrighted as it is a derivative file from, which is extremely similar to that of PSOE, but falls under a different legal framework - that of Albanian law. I hope you can take that into consideration. Regards, --Fer1997 (talk) 10:33, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
 * What I don't get to understand is that a derivation from a perfectly fine logo is, all of a sudden, a copyright violation. Even more so if, when both logos are compared, there are certain differences in height and some of the shapes. I hope this matter is fixed in the deletion page. --Fer1997 (talk) 10:39, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 17
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited People's Party (Spain) leadership election, 2018, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Santander ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/People%27s_Party_%28Spain%29_leadership_election%2C_2018 check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/People%27s_Party_%28Spain%29_leadership_election%2C_2018?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:19, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Electoral statistics
Hi, I have seen that you have created graphs of Electoral statistics and I would like to know with what program you do them, so that I can also contribute to make diagrams of that quality. Thanks! --Stalin990 (talk) 18:12, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Electoral map
Hi Impru20, how are you? I'm writing you because I would like to know how do you create your amazing maps regarding Spanish politics. In fact I would like to create similar maps for the Italian elections, but I sincerely don't know which program I could use. Thank you :) -- Nick.mon (talk) 17:18, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

SVG
What do you mean exactly by "The .svg cannot be made workable to be consistent with previous articles"? As I showed you with this file, it most certainly can. --RaviC (talk) 18:16, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Basque national party
You have reverted changes in Basque national party page

The official name of the party in English is "Basque National Party"

https://www.facebook.com/basquenationalparty/?ref=br_rs — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.99.79.62 (talk) 14:05, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I've replied to you in the article's talk page.  Impru20 talk 14:13, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

equo
Actually i am not editing, i am reverting the edit that this person did. He is removing some information that was there, i am reverting the edit. So if that info want to be delated, is that person who should open a disscuission.
 * The info in equo party have been there for a while with no changes or complains. Because it was intended to be reverted with no explanation, i added some sources, but if it is a disccuion about it, then it should stay for now how it was before the different point of views started, so that info cannot be removed.
 * so the problem is the sources? the disscuss about them. one by one.

Puigdemont's Crida
I must say you are right regarding Crida's project, regarding WP's Crystall ball policy. Just read the policy's text once again and you are right. Apologies for the unreversion. :-)Kippelboy (talk) 12:48, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 17
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Results breakdown of the Spanish local elections, 1983 (Galicia), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ferrol ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Results_breakdown_of_the_Spanish_local_elections%2C_1983_%28Galicia%29 check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Results_breakdown_of_the_Spanish_local_elections%2C_1983_%28Galicia%29?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:14, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Jaime Blanco García


The article Jaime Blanco García has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp/dated tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Natureium (talk) 18:49, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Ethnicelebs.com as a source
Hi Impru20. I noticed that you recently used ethnicelebs.com as a source for information in a biography article, Ada Colau. Please note that there is general consensus that ethnicelebs.com does not meet the reliable sourcing criteria for the inclusion of personal information in such articles. (See User_talk:XLinkBot/RevertList). If you disagree, let's discuss it. Thanks. --Ronz (talk) 19:32, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Javier Otano


The article Javier Otano has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp/dated tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Natureium (talk) 13:29, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Joaquín Leguina


The article Joaquín Leguina has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp/dated tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. &thinsp;&mdash; Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)&thinsp; 15:43, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Demonym translations for Spanish local elections
Hi! I have a comment regarding the translations of the demonyms included in the names of political organizations in local elections. As I see it, there are five ways of doing it, and I think we should stick to one of them and be consistent: 1. Preserve the original word (Convergència Poblera --> Pobler/Poblera Convergence) 2. Adapt the original word to English (Pobleran Convergence) 3. Use an English denomyn from the toponym (Poblese Convergence) 4. Use the form "of+toponym" (Convergence of Sa Pobla) 5. Use only the toponym (Sa Pobla Convergence) With the exception of some places as big cities, the majority of places doesn't have an English denomyn, so options 2 or 3 would mean making a word up. Option 1 would take the word from the place's Wikipedia page, and it could be used adapting it to the genre of the name or preserving the masculine singular form, which would be as the English language would use it. Options 4 and 5 would be less controversial.--Togiad (talk) 14:59, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

¿Puedes evaluar los artículos de Torre-Pacheco y de La Unión y asignarles un nuevo rango?
Los artículos de Torre-Pacheco y de La Unión, Murcia tienen el rango de Stub. Este corresponde cuando el artículo solo da una introducción y una descripción muy básica del tema.

Estos dos municipios a principios de año sí cumplían con los requisitos para ser «Stub», pero desde hace unos meses añadí mucho contenido a estos: su historia, su demografía, su geografía, «Main sights» y personajes principales. Además hay otros usuarios que me han corregido mis faltas gramaticales y ortográficas.

Creo que por lo menos estos dos artículos se merecen una el rango «Starter» y me gustaría que se evaluasen. Ya lo puse en la sección de evaluación en su momento, pero no ha dado resultado. Bueno, sí el de Torre-Pacheco lo revisaron e indicaron que había faltas ortográficas y gramaticales y pusieron el cartel de que requería copyediting, pero tras esto y con las faltas corregidas no ha habido mayor intervención en cuanto a su evaluación.

--Yolanda95 (talk) 08:40, 19 September 2018 (UTC)Yolanda95

Results breakdown of the Spanish local elections, 1979 (Balearic Islands)
Okay, I didn't mean to create a messy table, and I see why you undid the edit. However, I have been reviewing the results and found some errors in the ministry page. In any case, I think there should be a consistency when putting parties and candidacies in these kinds of tables. Maybe if the table is too long, then the threshold can be raised. If not, it is difficult to suppose which candidacies are important and why they are more important than others, it would be too subjective. Nevertheless, my intention is not to complicate or confuse things, so I'm open to suggestions.--Togiad (talk) 18:42, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Results breakdown of the Spanish local elections, 1983 (Balearic Islands)
Let's see. Results in Sa Pobla in 1983 for PSM and CP (INDEP in the Ministry page) are swapped. CP obtained an absolute majority. Some sources are:, , , Page 96. If you don't believe me or the sources and you will just leave the table as you want, then just please do not compare PSM results to CP, that would not be correct at all. Thank you. PD1: If you want more proofs of actual names of independent candidacies, I'm looking for them and putting here the most relevant if I can find them. It's a bit frustrating that you erase them but maintain some others for no reason. PD2: Apart from this, you reverted me more than once and then ended up with a table very similar to the one I constructed... So I think you should not be so fast reverting others' edits. Thank you.--Togiad (talk) 21:35, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Okay, there you have it, from page 6. I made a wrong assumption and I apologise for that. The swap in the Ministry page is triple. The actual results were: CP 3,260v/9c; AP 2,781v/7c; PSM 350v/1c; PSOE 302v/0c. This way, the councillors shown in the Historia Electoral page for PSOE and PSM coincide. I think it makes sense.--Togiad (talk) 08:09, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Encuesta CIS según El Confidencial
Buenas tardes, Impru. Te escribo porque leyendo periódicos me he encontrado este particular artículo de El Confidencial en el que se trabaja el estudio de campo del CIS y utiliza la que según ellos fue la metodología anterior al nuevo CIS tan manido últimamente. ¿Puede servirte para ponerlo como una encuesta más o no tiene valor más allá de la curiosidad? Un saludo y gracias por tus aportaciones. Asturkian (talk) 11:55, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Opinion polling for the Swedish general election, 2022
Thanks for trying to defuse the situtation, but there was really no need to change the reference format – the tagging was purely disruptive/point making and unfortunately I think your edit might only serve to embolden them to start being disruptive elsewhere... Number  5  7  11:17, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Locales Asturias 1983
Buenas. Sí, es cierto que faltan muchos concejos en las elecciones locales de 1983. Sin embargo, los resultados se pueden obtener en la hemeroteca de El Comercio. Más en concreto del día 10 de mayo de 1983, entre las páginas 11 y 14, vienen los escaños en todos los concejos asturianos y el recuento de votos en Gijón, por si te sirve de algo para salir del paso. Igual no es suficiente pero me apenaría que por un fallo del Ministerio no pudiera tener/poder ayudar en estos artículos. Un saludo. Asturkian (talk) 17:58, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Gabriel Urralburu


The article Gabriel Urralburu has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp/dated tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Praxidicae (talk) 19:43, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Parliament of Catalonia
Hi. I reverted your edit in Parliament of Catalonia because the members aren't legally suspended: https://www.parlament.cat/document/bopc/275863.pdf#page=70. The section B was passed but the A wasn't. Adriaesc (talk • contribs) 15:37, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Their votes may not be valid to vote but they are legally deputies, so they number of deputies has not changed. Adriaesc (talk) 19:47, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

List of shortest-lived states
As we've previously discussed the existing issues with this page, you may be interested in the ongoing deletion discussion there

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_shortest-lived_sovereign_states

European Parliament elections - Infobox heading
Hi, the change that I was making to the titles in the EP infoboxes is simply standardizing the title. The format varies a bit from county to country and year to year. I picked the commonest one and used that one. Spleodrach (talk) 21:45, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
 * The majority were actually in the format County European Parliament election, YYYY so that's why I went with that, e.g. United Kingdom European Parliament election, 1984 which has been in that format on that article for nearly 10 years. Your decision to a different format in not correct, just your personal opinion. So since you think you are correct, you can standarise all the articles to your format. My main concern was standarising the headings, I really couldn't care which of two equally correct options is chosen. Spleodrach (talk) 22:17, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Answer
I have explained in the Badalona one, for starters as long as having reliable third party sources available dealing with the event (which I am sure it is not the case with all the municipalities of Spain). Second, adhering to the same "arbitrary" criteria the 2015 Spanish local elections entry uses (arbitrary, but falling short of the 8,000 municipalities) is another possibility.--Asqueladd (talk) 06:50, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Because that compact format using the legislative election template fits the purpose of a "election for electing a full chamber" best, with the other one you mention giving not enough importance to the focus of the election (electing councillors from a list) detracted by what it is not actually elected in the election. This user has not invented the template, and it may be seen in other elections (with an awfully similar election system) such as the 2018 Belgrade one. In any case, I don't have a problem with discussing the merits of each one and how damaging may that be for Wikipedia.--Asqueladd (talk) 07:01, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
 * You considering WP:POLITICIAN in regards of assessing the individual notability of biographies does not change the ultimate nature of any election. Mixing two different things here is an editorial disservice. I can certainly show you examples of how reliable sources tend to summarize elections in Spain using tables and graphics.--Asqueladd (talk) 07:12, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
 * What criteria? You accuse me of not reading, but you are also reading me sketchy at best. Barring the use of the standard "you have sources, you create content based on them" criteria (outrageous, right?), the same criteria the 2015 Spanish local elections entry uses for summarizing the change in city control ("Provincial capitals and municipalities above 75,000").--Asqueladd (talk) 07:18, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
 * And, man, sorry for the personal remark, but you literally blanking the Zaragoza one (5th municipality, 666,058 inhabitantes) while also creating the Seville one (4th municipality 693,878 inhabitants) should mark a milestone of unconstructive editing in Wikipedia, certainly worth of some personal introspection.--Asqueladd (talk) 07:29, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
 * You also claim I need to "abide to BRD". Have you considered that returning entries created some time ago (all of them reviewed by third party users, not me, not you) to the original version, may be the stable version while you may be the one violating BRD when you repeatedly blank them?--Asqueladd (talk) 07:45, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, consejos vendo que para mí no tengo. Let's see:
 * Out of the blue you decided to create entries for the local elections of the four biggest municipalities in Spain since 1979, some of them without providing a single friggin' source offering context/analyzing the actual election!!!! Is 4 a magic number or something?
 * When a user different than you create entries for the same thing in case of other big municipalities (including the next most populated municipality!, and all of them deemed within the group of "relevant" municipalities in the entry about the 2015 Spanish local elections), all of them providing at least a reliable source offering context for the election, you bluntly blanked all of them (because going down the slippery slope, you can't have articles for "8000 municipalities"!). That cognitive dissonance is rich, and foremost, it is disruptive and a pattern of abuse.
 * You blatantly gave a bad assessing about the content of the entries you blanked, like if they were any different from the ones you created. The reality is that barring the inclusion of polls in some of the later, the former actually feature more content about the actual election, with the ones created by you being larger in size mostly because of the inclusion of the same bloc of redundant information about the electoral system across entries that could be better adressed in a potential Spanish local elections entry dealing with electoral legislation and the likes.
 * Is it rich, isn't it. The reality is that local elections elect local councillors regardless of the individual notability of those biographies to merit and standalone article, and you can't trump that reality (this goes about also the infobox structure and the information in the body of the entry). But then an arbitrary (unlike the former criteria) list of city control change of notable "municipalities" can be included in the 2015 Spanish local elections to the dreaded 8,000 municipalities (which needless to say, it is not the purpose of the election). And at the same time, none can apparently use that same arbitrary list to extract a criteria of notability of municipalities (other than "4 is enough, because four is the number I got to"?).
 * And finally you try to position yourself in a place of power in this dispute pointing out in a patronizing way that I "need to abide to WP:BRD", when any editor will tell you that the one not abiding to WP:BRD, when you are repeatedly blanking reviewed entries, is you. All of them while "we discuss". How considerate! Why you don't blank the articles of local elections in Spain created by you while "we discuss" too?
 * I will continue.--Asqueladd (talk) 08:38, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Additionally, I see you keep on repeating a twisted line of thinking, pulling the same one also in regional elections (where it was solved not because of going to the point, but because of adressing notability of standalone biographies). In the most intransigent fashion, you sport the combination of WP:LIST and WP:POLITICIAN policies to deny the addition of whoever was elected in a given election in the article of that election. That's really really going over the top at interpreting policies, because that is not just a mere "Wikipedia list of people". It is also the frigging "result of the election" (the purpose of the whole event, and therefore a core element, if not the core element, for the comprehension of the article). If you question the notability of the results of any election you may be better served questioning the full entries altogether (not just a section), instead of using the argument to distort the meaning of those elections. Because failing to do the former, thus trying to describe a process considering the purpose of that process non-notable, you are bound to create foul creations.--Asqueladd (talk) 10:05, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 27
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2000 Spanish general election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 1977 general election ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/2000_Spanish_general_election check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/2000_Spanish_general_election?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:16, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

2015 Valencian regional election
This article is a member of and is there because MediaWiki does not recognize Valencian as a language name. The cs1|2 templates put articles in that category when the value assigned to language is not a language name or ISO 639 code recognized by MediaWiki. There is no direct ISO 639 code for Valencian but there is an IANA language tag,, which is as close cs1|2 can get at present.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 09:58, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * shows up as "Catalan", which in essence is the same as if you used, which is obviously not what intended when using "Valencian", which is a officially-recognized language according to the Valencian statute of autonomy. Possibly, it should be either made as a recognizable ISO 639 code by MediaWiki or else, but changing the name from "Valencian" to "Catalan" in those articles where the first is intended as the proper ref language tag to use is not the most appropiate solution, I think.  Impru 20  talk 10:13, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Your complaint against me was: This gave no error so I don't know how this translates as a "cite repair". I came here to show that there is an error and to explain why it is there, all in defense of your accusation that I was doing something other than 'cite repair'.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 10:57, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * And your language tag change edit summary was cite repair, which was not an obvious thing since the cite itself did not give errors within the article. In fact, when you explained where the error was, you did not even mention the words "cite" or "repair", but argued that "There is no direct ISO 639 code for Valencian". This is not the same as a citing error (of which there could be multiple ones) nor a cite needing repair. A clearer edit summary in the first place, explaining that this was due to the ISO 639 code issue, would have worked better. Impru 20  talk 11:05, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * There is a message in the article. To see the message and others like it, you must enable them; instructions for that are at.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 13:16, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I have hacked Module:Citation/CS1/sandbox and Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration/sandbox to support Valencian and ca-valencia (MediaWiki still does not):
 * After the next cs1|2 module suite update, templates with these language-parameter values will categorize into as a subcategory of.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 15:10, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * After the next cs1|2 module suite update, templates with these language-parameter values will categorize into as a subcategory of.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 15:10, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * After the next cs1|2 module suite update, templates with these language-parameter values will categorize into as a subcategory of.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 15:10, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 15:10, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Podemos
I think you should at least mention the connection between Catalunya Sí que es Pot and Barcelona en Comú, because they are largely identical and it was also made in the regional election in Catalonia 2017 (heir even in a column). Braganza (talk) 16:56, 24 December 2018 (UTC)


 * @User:Impru20 I know, but it can be confusing for readers to introduce extra columns for sister parties, especially if you list En Comú Podem and Catalunya en Comú–Podem anyway. Braganza (talk) 10:03, 27 December 2018 (UTC)