Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Commonwealth of Catalonia


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy keep, nomination withdrawn, no other recommendation to delete. Non-admin closure — Frankie (talk) 16:21, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Commonwealth of Catalonia

 * – ( View AfD View log )

There have been no improvements of sources given in over 2 years. I have no idea if anything about this article is fact or fantasy but two plus years seems enough time to fix this. I have no idea how this made it through the "new page patrol" when it was created and for all we know it could be plagiarism. Fyunck(click) (talk) 09:44, 3 March 2012 (UTC)


 * After reading several comments I have re-evaluated my AFD. Perhaps I should have used, , .... except on BLP. I formally withdraw this AFD nomination. Please close. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:36, 3 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Merge Looks real, content should not be lost. North8000 (talk) 12:38, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment on the numerous Catalonia AFD's My gut feel is that they could all meet wp:notability individually, have content which should be retained, and that they would be best consolidated into to a new article, possibly Political history of Catalonia.  Between being topics that are somewhat obscure in the English speaking world, and that sources are more likely to be in Spanish explains why these articles lack editors and are hard to work on. (I.E. not due to unsuitability of the topic.)  I have also posted the following at the Catalonia article:
 * There are about 12 Catalonia articles up for deletion (todays AFD's). Most are on obscure political historical topics, have no editors, and no sources, but good content.  One suggestion would be to create a "Political History of Catalonia" article and put all of those orphans into it and bring them out of obscurity so that they can get a bit of attention. Or else give the individual article some attention.
 * Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 13:04, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * It made it through New Page Patrol in 2005 probably because back then people adhered more to the "Make some effort to look it up yourself." ideal, for those who would aspire to be encyclopaedia writers, than they do now. It's not exactly hard to put the Catalan title  &mdash; which was also the article title in 2005 &mdash; into Google Books and come up with history books already covering this part of history in depth, such as .  One history book even points to a 1981 encyclopaedia  with an entry on this.  Putting not even as much effort in as did new page patrollers in 2005 is not what an AFD nominator should aim for.
 * Uncle G (talk) 13:58, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep This topic is not purely political, as it refers to an actual governmental structure of the Catalonian provinces at the time. It is already given brief treatment in History of Catalonia, an article that's begging to be broken up into separate pages by era (it currently covers prehistory to 2005). This material should be one page, or part of one page, in a "History of Catalonia" series. ``` t o l l ` b o o t h ` w i l l i e `` $1.25 PLEASE ``` 20:18, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. BlueBirdo (talk) 16:42, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
 * Keep. BlueBirdo (talk) 16:42, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.