Misplaced Pages

Talk:Valencian Community: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 21:47, 4 April 2007 editDúnadan (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users6,967 edits Valencian Vs. Catalan Round 2507 and counting...← Previous edit Revision as of 22:06, 4 April 2007 edit undoMaurice27 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users3,470 editsNo edit summaryNext edit →
Line 74: Line 74:
*Why is it so important, Dunadan, to make clear that Valencian is catalan in this main article, and is not important at all to mention that catalan is called in Majorca "mallorquí" by its speakers? Not even to mention it '''ANY SINGLE TIME'''? If you think it is important to mention that valencian is what catalan is called in valencia, then it should be equally important to mention that mallorquí is what catalan is called in Majorca. You see my point? Or your "encyclopedic neutrality" does not let you?. *Why is it so important, Dunadan, to make clear that Valencian is catalan in this main article, and is not important at all to mention that catalan is called in Majorca "mallorquí" by its speakers? Not even to mention it '''ANY SINGLE TIME'''? If you think it is important to mention that valencian is what catalan is called in valencia, then it should be equally important to mention that mallorquí is what catalan is called in Majorca. You see my point? Or your "encyclopedic neutrality" does not let you?.
:''"Not neutral enough without the explanation"'' are Dunadan's words. Well I think it is not neutral enough to "''mysteriously forget"'' about "mallorquí, ibicenc or menorquí" either. And you are a member of the catalan-speaking project? :''"Not neutral enough without the explanation"'' are Dunadan's words. Well I think it is not neutral enough to "''mysteriously forget"'' about "mallorquí, ibicenc or menorquí" either. And you are a member of the catalan-speaking project?


*You said, Casaforra, that ''"after a long while this page was calm"''... Of course, '''at least while nobody changed "your" edits'''. You ask me to ''"open a debate in the talk page"''. Well, that has been done many times in the past with:
**The Naming of the community also in Spanish (because half the pop. do speak that language). The Catalan name is also the official in "Comunitat Autònoma de les Illes Balears", but only the "illes balears" part... Spanish, is also present with "Comunidad Autónoma de las Illes Balears". Then, why your "neutrality" doesn't let us, poor wikipedians, to write the name in spanish?
**The flag ratio (which I '''proved''' to be 2:3). Nobody talked about it... And a '''wrong one is still used'''.
**The use of "english" naming (i.e Alicante is used by english speakers). Alicante is constantly changed for ] even if, when linked, turns to be Alicante in the article's title. Again this is the english wikipedia, not the spanish nor the catalan.
**Valencia is constantly changed to València. Why? if this is the english wikipedia? If Valencia (in english) turns out to be written like Valencia (in spanish) I'm so sorry... It is just the way it is.

:So, if neither of these matters (all of them exposed in the talk page long ago), which are opposed to your "ideals", have never been discussed by you, why should I take the time to write them? You just don't care to argue matters you know you will lose. Therefore, I do the same thing. I prevail my opinion to undo or revert others edits if I think they are wrong, just the same way you do it.

--] 20:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC)




Line 87: Line 98:




:In first place, try not to write in the middle of other's comments... It makes it difficult to follow. I hope me moving it to the bottom does not bother you.


*The sentence: ''"The co-official languages in the Balearic Islands are ''Spanish'' and ''Catalan'' (i.e. ''mallorquí'', ''menorquí'' and ''eivissenc'', as Catalan is known by its speakers in this territory)."'' seems very good to me. If you never opposed to specified the names of catalan in the balears, you will be ok with me to add it.
*You said, Casaforra, that ''"after a long while this page was calm"''... Of course, '''at least while nobody changed "your" edits'''. You ask me to ''"open a debate in the talk page"''. Well, that has been done many times in the past with:
*If, instead than reverting other's edit (I'm not talking about you), some people used their time to improve other articles, wikipedia would improve a lot.
**The Naming of the community also in Spanish (because half the pop. do speak that language). The Catalan name is also the official in "Comunitat Autònoma de les Illes Balears", but only the "illes balears" part... Spanish, is also present with "Comunidad Autónoma de las Illes Balears". Then, why your "neutrality" doesn't let us, poor wikipedians, to write the name in spanish?
*About the " "bold" characters (as with capital letters) implying shouting"... '''I'M SORRY IT DID UPSET YOU SO MUCH, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE IT MORE VISIBLE, BUT WHEN SOMEONE TELLS ME ABOUT WP:Etiquette TO SHOW RESPECT TO SOME USERS THAT KEEP OBSTRUCTING OTHER'S WORKS (AGAIN, NOT REFERING TO YOU PRECISELY), I CAN'T REFRAIN MYSELF...''' Sorry again, Dunadan --] 22:06, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
**The flag ratio (which I '''proved''' to be 2:3). Nobody talked about it... And a '''wrong one is still used'''.
**The use of "english" naming (i.e Alicante is used by english speakers). Alicante is constantly changed for ] even if, when linked, turns to be Alicante in the article's title. Again this is the english wikipedia, not the spanish nor the catalan.
**Valencia is constantly changed to València. Why? if this is the english wikipedia? If Valencia (in english) turns out to be written like Valencia (in spanish) I'm so sorry... It is just the way it is.

:So, if neither of these matters (all of them exposed in the talk page long ago), which are opposed to your "ideals", have never been discussed by you, why should I take the time to write them? You just don't care to argue matters you know you will lose. Therefore, I do the same thing. I prevail my opinion to undo or revert others edits if I think they are wrong, just the same way you do it.

--] 20:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:06, 4 April 2007

WikiProject iconCatalan-speaking countries Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Catalan-speaking countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history, languages, and cultures of Catalan-speaking countries on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Catalan-speaking countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Catalan-speaking countriesTemplate:WikiProject Catalan-speaking countriesCatalan-speaking countries
???This article has not yet received a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconSpain Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpainWikipedia:WikiProject SpainTemplate:WikiProject SpainSpain
???This article has not yet received a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Archive
Archives
  1. Talk: /Archive 1
  2. Talk: /Archive 2
  3. Talk: /Archive 3
  4. Talk: /Archive 4 (name discussion&agreement)



Valencian Vs. Catalan Round 2507 and counting...

Is there any reason to have to explain than Valencian is the name by which catalan is know by its speakers in that territory in almost every single article where "valencian" word is used? Again, if someone wants to know what Valencian is, he can link in the name (that's why the "" are there...) --Maurice27 16:20, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I would say, it is not necessary on every article (I didn't include it in Names of the Valencian Community), but I do believe it is necessary to include it in this article, given that it is the main article about the Community in whose Statue the official denomination of Valencian is included. By the way, you cannot compare the case of Majorca, since the official denomination in its Statute is in fact, Catalan.--the Dúnadan 16:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Go ask a majorcan how they call the language they speak... But of course, that reality is not interesting for "the catalanist block", so, no one from that block has ever tried to explain in Balearic Islands' article that catalan is called there "Mallorquí" or "Menorquí" or "Ibicenc" by its speakers. If it is not important in majorcan articles, why should it be in valencian one?... Again, the Catalan-Speaking project is "not specially neutral". Every single autonomous community in Spain with various official languages has all the naming in those languages... But Valencia, which only has the Valencian one. (who cares if 50% of the pop. speaks spanish daily)... 100% of the catalan speaking community in Balears will say they speak "Mallorquí" or "Menorquí" or "Ibicenc", but NOT A SINGLE reference to those names are given... That's very encyclopedic. NPOV??... come on, give us a break!!! --Maurice27 16:46, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
The main difference is that the official denomination of the language is the Balearic Islands is also "Catalan", and almost everybody reckons the dialects therein spoken as "Catalan" as well, even if colloquially they may refer to the local varieties by name (not that different from what Mexicans mean when they say that someone speaks "yucateco", which is quite a different dialect in intonation and vocabulary from the central Mexican dialect). If at all, for the inclusion of all points of view, the Balearic Island article should read that the official language is "Catalan" whose local varieties are colloquially or informally referred to as mallorquí, menorquí and ibecenc. Here, the article should say that the official language is Valencian (as the article already states), and then, given its importance as a central article and the first in which the term would appear, explain that it refers to the same language otherwise called Catalan (the only other official or statutory denomination). The rest of the article should use only Valencian. Like I said, both cases are somewhat different, but at least the lead section (and probably the demographic section) should explain the issue. In other articles (like the one I did on Names of the Valencian Community) --the Dúnadan 18:10, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
while I personally think it is giving in to a certain Catalanist POV, since, to anyone with the slightest curiousity, he finds out that Valencian is a Catalan dialect only by clicking in that word, then it is also true that there was some sort of loose consensus achieved maybe a couple months ago regarding making this mention to Valencian as a manner of speaking Catalan and then, the rest of the article, would read Valencian only.
once again, we could reopen the debate if needed, because, as mentioned above, knowing that Valencian is some sort of Catalan it is only one click away and, indeed, that interest in making very clear here that Valencian is Catalan rings somewhat POVish, given the fact that 99,9% of the Valencian population call it Valencian (that explain recurrent anon editing and some vandalism of this piece) and the relevant article is there to explain what Valencian is anyway. Mountolive | Talk 16:52, 4 April 2007 (UTC)


Not really, in fact, NPOV also requires that all information should be easily accessible and open, at least, in the main article of the Community (this one). If loose consensus was achieved, the debate can nonetheless be reopened, and this time a rough or a full consensus could be achieved, through polling. --the Dúnadan 18:10, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
It could actually be argued that a click away is not enough. Not portraying the fact that both are the same language could be somewhat POVish (sic), or I would say more POVish that a neutral explanation of the fact. The 99.9%, other than your own personal assessment, is unsourced and far from true. --the Dúnadan 18:10, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, let's re-open it, because then, if not, we will have someone willing to add that "the official language of Monaco is French, shared with France, parts of Belgium, parts of Switzerland and many other territories". --Maurice27 17:12, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Far-fetched comparison. Most non-Iberian residents know that French is French (one single denomination), whereas few English speakers know that Valencian is Catalan, unless otherwise specified. --the Dúnadan 18:10, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Don't take it literally: Maurice is referring to a similar discussion held somewhere else where, again, there was some urge by some users to make very clear the Catalan domain. In that case it was quite more flagrant than here.
Well, indeed "it could be argued that a click away is not enough"...from a certain POV. And so it is argued here indeed. As for neutrality, there can't be anything more neutral than saying that "Spanish and Valencian are the official languages". It can't get more neutral than this, because that is how the Estatut puts it.
Not neutral enough without the explanation. There is no reason to hide the explanation that Catalan and Valencian are the same under NPOV.--the Dúnadan 19:20, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
As for assessing percentages, I conceed that I may indeed have been wrong and the number of people in the Valencian Community calling Valencian "Catalan" may be as high as, say, around 3% of the population, from my previous 0,1% guessing. But that leaves my reasoning pretty much intact, or so I believe.
Again, 3% (even if true, which I doubt) is still your assessment. My assessment could be as high as 30% (mostly in the northern region of Valencia). Even if the 3% is true, setting a threshold of 3% to determine whether an argument is valid or not is still arbitrary. --the Dúnadan 19:20, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
This said, I guess I won't make a case of maintaining that POVish (sic) statement, but it would be nice if the guys supporting it admitted that they are not free of POV, like everybody else, I guess... Mountolive | Talk 18:23, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Let's not get confused. All claims are POV. The inclusion of all claims makes the article NPOV (see: WP:NPOV). That is why advocate for the inclusion of the sentence that explains that both are the same language, by NPOV policy of Misplaced Pages.--the Dúnadan 19:20, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
An agreement was reached for the formula:
 The official languages are Spanish and Valencian (as Catalan is known by its speakers in this territory).
Maurice27, if you disagree that consensus then re-open the debate here in the talk page, but don't simply reverse. That's not nice of you.
The Balearic Islands Estatut says that their own language is Catalan with the proper and traditional Balearic dialects. And Balearic people don't discuss they speak Catalan. No way, don't lie.
Valencian Estatut says the ONLY official name for the region is Comunitat Valenciana.
Maurice, I'd invite you to think twice before acting your usual way. While you weren't here many people talked, collaborated and got an agreement. Dúnadan helped everybody by moving the names debate to their own article (Names of the Valencian Community), and after a long while this page was calm. Please don't disrupt as you use to do, and if you keep disagreing, please open a debate in the talk page before reverting what people peacefully agreed.
--Casaforra (parlem-ne) 18:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Casaforra, it was you yourself who started this round of reverting here, with the edit summary "rv blavarist vandalism". You may disagree with the opinion of the anonymous editor, but the edit in no way amounts to vandalism. Physchim62 (talk) 20:12, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
There was a discussion and an agreement for this formula. Everything that don't follow it has to be first discussed. Otherwise, can be considered vandalism, since is going against the stablished concensous. I think we found already an unconfortable position to everybody. I think we won't go further discussing always the same points when you don't find them as nice as they could be. --Xtv - (my talk) - (que dius que què?) 20:31, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
I vaguely remember a dispute involving this issue, although the only traces I can find are various spikes in the eternal Castilian/Spanish debate. We didn't agree, we just went on to argue about something else. Ho hum. Physchim62 (talk) 21:06, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Mountolive, be fair:
As for neutrality, there can't be anything more neutral than saying that "Spanish and Valencian are the official languages"
We may say Spanish and Catalan or we may say Castilian and Valencian. But that's another debate.
--Casaforra (parlem-ne) 18:31, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
If you keep telling Maurice how bad boy he was, you are actually giving him little chance to turn into a good boy... Mountolive | Talk 18:33, 4 April 2007 (UTC)


I was not a bad boy, I still am, the same way I was a good boy and I still am. Let's start point by point:
  • I reverted because you, Casaforra, decided that your POV IS the good one, and as far as I'm concerned nobody entitled you that right. So, if I think I should revert, I will. I was only asked to comment it in the talk page, which I did.
  • Why is it so important, Dunadan, to make clear that Valencian is catalan in this main article, and is not important at all to mention that catalan is called in Majorca "mallorquí" by its speakers? Not even to mention it ANY SINGLE TIME? If you think it is important to mention that valencian is what catalan is called in valencia, then it should be equally important to mention that mallorquí is what catalan is called in Majorca. You see my point? Or your "encyclopedic neutrality" does not let you?.
"Not neutral enough without the explanation" are Dunadan's words. Well I think it is not neutral enough to "mysteriously forget" about "mallorquí, ibicenc or menorquí" either. And you are a member of the catalan-speaking project?


  • You said, Casaforra, that "after a long while this page was calm"... Of course, at least while nobody changed "your" edits. You ask me to "open a debate in the talk page". Well, that has been done many times in the past with:
    • The Naming of the community also in Spanish (because half the pop. do speak that language). The Catalan name is also the official in "Comunitat Autònoma de les Illes Balears", but only the "illes balears" part... Spanish, is also present with "Comunidad Autónoma de las Illes Balears". Then, why your "neutrality" doesn't let us, poor wikipedians, to write the name in spanish?
    • The flag ratio (which I proved to be 2:3). Nobody talked about it... And a wrong one is still used.
    • The use of "english" naming (i.e Alicante is used by english speakers). Alicante is constantly changed for Alacant even if, when linked, turns to be Alicante in the article's title. Again this is the english wikipedia, not the spanish nor the catalan.
    • Valencia is constantly changed to València. Why? if this is the english wikipedia? If Valencia (in english) turns out to be written like Valencia (in spanish) I'm so sorry... It is just the way it is.
So, if neither of these matters (all of them exposed in the talk page long ago), which are opposed to your "ideals", have never been discussed by you, why should I take the time to write them? You just don't care to argue matters you know you will lose. Therefore, I do the same thing. I prevail my opinion to undo or revert others edits if I think they are wrong, just the same way you do it.

--Maurice27 20:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC)


I have already answered your questions enough, but I will rephrase this time. Please note that using "bold" characters (as with capital letters) implies shouting. To keep the debate cooled down and in full respect of all members, I kindly ask you to refrain from using it, unless it is to highlight a specific word or phrase in an argument.
To answer again to your question as to why it is important to specify that Catalan and Valencian are the same language here, but not in Balearic Islands:
  • I never opposed specifying anything in the Balearic Islands. Just be reminded that the situation is not equivalent, and therefore any comparison between both purported POVs or NPOVs must take the differences into account. The only statutory denomination of the language in the Balearic Islands is "Catalan". Most of the residents agree, even if they have specific names for the local varieties. As such, even if we do not mention the names of local varieties, the article would be NPOV. However, the article in the Balearic Islands could read: "The co-official language in the Balearic Islands is Catalan, whose local varieties are called mallorquí, menorquí and ivecenc." This is acceptable and appropriate, and I think we should add it. But as you can see, the phrasing is different, adequately portraying the statutory denomination of the language.
  • In the case of the Valencian Community the statutory denomination is "Valencian". In order to specify that we are referring to the same language here, we should add a phrase explaining so: "The co-official language is Valencian (which refers to the same language called Catalan).
Finally, Maurice, I did not understand what you meant by "mysteriously forgetting". Per, WP:Etiquette, please be reminded to assume good faith.
--the Dúnadan 21:35, 4 April 2007 (UTC)


In first place, try not to write in the middle of other's comments... It makes it difficult to follow. I hope me moving it to the bottom does not bother you.
  • The sentence: "The co-official languages in the Balearic Islands are Spanish and Catalan (i.e. mallorquí, menorquí and eivissenc, as Catalan is known by its speakers in this territory)." seems very good to me. If you never opposed to specified the names of catalan in the balears, you will be ok with me to add it.
  • If, instead than reverting other's edit (I'm not talking about you), some people used their time to improve other articles, wikipedia would improve a lot.
  • About the " "bold" characters (as with capital letters) implying shouting"... I'M SORRY IT DID UPSET YOU SO MUCH, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE IT MORE VISIBLE, BUT WHEN SOMEONE TELLS ME ABOUT WP:Etiquette TO SHOW RESPECT TO SOME USERS THAT KEEP OBSTRUCTING OTHER'S WORKS (AGAIN, NOT REFERING TO YOU PRECISELY), I CAN'T REFRAIN MYSELF... Sorry again, Dunadan --Maurice27 22:06, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Categories: