User talk:Verdy p/archive17

{{Unknown}}[edit]

According to the description This template can be used in the "source" or "author" parameters of the {{Information}} to render the word "unknown" in the language specified in the user's preferences. After your changes additional word is added, e.g. {{unknown|author}} is rendered as "Unknown author" what does not make much sense when used in author field of {{Information}}. It should be just "Unknown" as it was before. For some languages, e.g. Polish or Russian, it is completely screwed up as it is rendered as "Nieznany author" or "Неизвестен author". The same applies to {{unknown|source}}. --jdx ^Re: 08:02, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It has a parameter... So what? I did not invent it. And there was partail translation already. The paramter was in fact needed to correctly set the grammatical gender for the adjective. If you don't want to show the noun, you can remove it, but the adjective can still be needing adjustment dependeing on the noun (masculine, feminine or neutral?). verdy_p (talk) 13:54, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I know what parameter is for. The point is that the template should translate only the word "unknown", optionally taking into account gender for some languages. So e.g. for French {{unknown|author}} should display only "inconnu" (or "Inconnu"), not "Auteur inconnu" becuse it does not make much sense and looks kinda stupid when used as intended. And does not comply with the description. --jdx ^Re: 19:44, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The noun was present in French and other languages even before my changes; if you don't want this name to appear, you can remove it, but keep in mind that it should match the grammatical gender for the adjective... All I did was to add more languages: the italic are jsut there because this may need a fix: if you fix the adjectiove, you can remove the noun if you don't want it; no problem for that. verdy_p (talk) 19:47, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

From your request I removed the untranslated nouns in italic (but not that the adjective may not be correctly adapted, the italic was there to indicate that adaptation may be needed). verdy_p (talk) 19:54, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Subject by century[edit]

Hi, I apologize for my not too refined English: I don't know if it is a consequence of your changes in the {{Subject by century}}, but in Italian is incorrett the use of ordinal indicator, unlike what is written in the article en:Ordinal indicator, along with a Roman numeral, reed please en:Roman numerals, that is, it is correct 1º, 2º, 3º (1st, 2nd, 3th) but not Iº, IIº, IIIº (only I, II, III). Also ask in the Italian Commons bar, or to Italian users who are competent in Italian grammar. In Italian we have a common saying (or expression) "è un pugno nell'occhio", litterally "is a fist in the eye" (I don't know an equivalent one) :-) --Threecharlie (talk) 05:27, 5 July 2020 (UTC) Oh, je lis seulement maintenant que votre langue est le français (que je connais très peu), je pense qu'il sera plus facile de forer une confirmation sur ce que je vous ai écrit ci-dessus (également simplement dans n'importe quelle plaque latine d'une église sur le territoire français) :-) --Threecharlie (talk) 05:31, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is part of the Ordinal template (there's also a module for that... I don't understand what is correct or incorrect in your question/comment, so I cannot fix it. Can you reformulate in plain Italian ? I think your level of English or even French is not clear enough to beunderstood correctly.

Idid not change something in {{Subject by century}} that is specific to Italian. I just used the existing translations for ordinal centuries.

If you are speaking about the designation of centuries or milleniums, each one has its distinguished style. They can be tuned as needed in Template:Millennium and Template:Century which contain the code. These codes come from styles that were already used in Wikidata and imported "as is", or checked from several sources (Wikipedia, and so on).

I don't see an incorrect usage of the ordinal indicator. Do you suggest that this should use the ordinal indicator (superscript o/a) but not the roman numbers? verdy_p (talk) 13:30, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Regions of Spain[edit]

I see you have turned Category:Regions of Spain back from a category redirect to an actual category, while leaving Category talk:Regions of Spain as a redirect to Category talk:Comarcas of Spain, which is a discussion of why Category:Regions of Spain was a poorly chosen category name. Has there been a further discussion that ~~chanted~~ changed that consensus? Also, in particular, what is even the intended definition of the (effectively new) Category:Regions of Spain? Does it refer to the historic regiones, or is it just any subdivisions of Spain, in which latter case, as discussed clear back in 2010, this is not a good name for such a category. - Jmabel ! talk 00:28, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are more "regions" than just autonous communities and provinces, there are also military, judiciary regions, and other kinds (including natural regions, and of course historic ones)

I don't think it is a poor name, as it related to various types entities and the term is still disguishing them properly in subcategories, instead of "merging" them all as if they were "autonomous communities" (which they are'nt all). verdy_p (talk) 00:33, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How is Category:Regions of Spain distinct from Category:Subdivisions of Spain?

Also, please see en:1833 territorial division of Spain and en:Nationalities and regions of Spain for an indication of why the word "region" is particularly tricky with reference to Spain: the term región, (now usually región histórica) had a specific meaning there, comparable (but not identical) to what are now called autonomous communities.

I see you read some Spanish: es:División territorial de España en 1833 illustrates well why the term is problematic. Under the 1833 territorial division, the 49 provincias were grouped into 15 regiones: the term had a juridical meaning. As that article also indicates, this usage persisted well into the 20th century. I'm old enough that I was in school in the years of the Franco dictatorship, when this was still the division of Spain, before the present "autonomous regions" existed; for anyone who knew Spain before 1978, the word will definitely have this very specific connotation. - 03:59, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Connotations are irrelevant, you are speaking about historical regions which should be labelled as "historical". Still there are "Military regions", "statistical regions". The term is now generic and has no longer a current legal adminsitrative status, so it can be used as a generic, leaving aside the historical regions with a more precise expression.

Anyway you speak about "autonomous regions" and the categories are more adequately named "autonomous communities". Another proof that you used "regions" as a generic. verdy_p (talk) 04:06, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, slip of the (metaphorical) tongue in referring to "autonomous regions", but my point stands. (Some of the "autonomous communities" correspond to "historic regions"; others to nacionalidades. It can get a little tricky when I'm thinking simultaneously in two languages. I believe you are yourself multilingual enough to be familiar with such things.)

Again: for anyone familiar with Spain before 1978 -- which is to say anyone roughly 50 or older from Spain or who grew up significantly aware of Spain -- the term has a very specific connotation. And, yes, connotations matter. As does consensus, which you should not unilaterally overturn without discussion and without even an effort to contact the people who reached the consensus. As does history. Just like we wouldn't call a comarca a "county," even though they are analogous to what in most countries we would call a "county" and even though Spain no longer has condados. - Jmabel ! talk 04:47, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comarcas in Spain is a rather complex subject, various types, some official in some communities, others have multiple definitions depending on use (different definitions between the provinvial or community use, or governement/miniterial use or agencies (agriculture, natural, planned, tourism/cultural...), and sometimes with different terms (subdivisions in Navarre, or in insular communities, or in Catalunya). Comarcas are left to be defined by autonomous communities under their own system, but as long as they have not legifered, other administrations may reuse the term with their own definitions (and they don't agree together).

anyway we are speaking about the English term, not the terms used in each Spanish language verdy_p (talk) 04:55, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Then back to the basic question: how is Category:Regions of Spain distinct from Category:Subdivisions of Spain? - Jmabel ! talk 14:47, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

They are a part of subdivisions that are larger an independant of municipalities (or other smaller "populated places" part of municipalities: neighborhoods, city districts...)

Not all "regions" are administrative subdivisions they shape can change independantly of the applicable law, depending and who promotes them: touristic regions, natural regions, statistical regions (including NUTS), military regions (national leve), education regions, judiciary regions, cultural regions...

The "subdivisions" category still show the two navboxes for autonomous communities and provinces that are the main subdivisions (which are also kep in their own category)

There's clearly a need to a "regions category" (as demonstrated by the military maps inside, and the NUTS statsitical regions). Before, regions were abusively redirected to "autonomous communities, which was effectively wrong to designate all types of "regions" (NUTS, military, natural, cultural, linguistic, religious, parishes, historic...).

Note: I should probably rename the navbox template "Regions of Spain" into "Autonomous communities of Spain", but I would still keep the redirect, as I doubt there will be a need to include other kinds of regions in it, and "Regions" is easier to type in the source of pages (even if they list only "autonomous communities").

verdy_p (talk) 14:56, 14 July 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Let me jump in here. This not a direct response to what has been said above, of which I don't have an opinion. It's just a related topic. I made many of the svg locator maps in that ubiquitous red/grey/eggshell theme. And I created many of the categories for these pics. I've watched you doing multiple changes regarding the cats. That's OK. They are not my categories nor do I have a patent on the scheme or a grand indisputable theory behind the naming scheme. Hence, this is just a friendly note: If the locator maps in one category all show the location of a subdivision within a particular country (region, continent) (the overarching entity being the reference frame for the location map), it should be named e.g.[...] provinces in Spain (location maps scheme. If the category bundles other map schemes, in particular containing subcats that e.g. show the sub-subdivisions of a country, this category should be named [...] provinces of Spain (location maps scheme). Reasons should be obvious: it makes semantic sense and allows deeper category schemes. For an example, plz. cf. Category:SVG locator maps of Russia (location map scheme). As I said, this is just an explanation that you may or may not ignore. In any case, thanks for contributing to the categorization. Bye--TUBS 09:19, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have followed the existing conventions, not invented new names, the primary divisions "provinces" and "communities" were already named with "of", other entities (municapilities, districts) were "of". verdy_p (talk) 11:07, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:SVG_locator_maps_of_states_in_Venezuela_(location_map_scheme)&action=history However, as I said, that's Ok if you're Ok with that. Just wanted to make sure that you know the idea. Don't know whether this a helpful intervention or not. Doesn't matter. No need to argue about. Thx again for your work. Greetings.--TUBS 12:14, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Verdy p: clearly you and I are not going to come to an agreement on this. We need to bring this to a broader group and get consensus. If you have a specific, reasonable suggestion on how to do that, I am open on that. Otherwise, I'll propose a way to proceed. - Jmabel ! talk 15:15, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the problem in Venezuela as you suggest, I followed the same convention used for states of Venezuela (which was already there: I used the most common scheme).

Anyway I agree with you about the nameing for municipalities ('in', not 'of'). Only communities and provinces keep "of" (becuse it was the most common and already used in many existing :navboxes.

For municipalities, It is in agreement with other countries, and the fact that the main category (for whole Spain, not necessarily by province or community) were using also "in". I'm unifying them so that navboxes work without lot of tests (for provinces there's a lot of different naming conventsions I found (so they are used in "all=1" to show them if they exist, but without "all=1" only the first found within aliases is used: this minimizes the number of redirects needed. verdy_p (talk) 15:22, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Since you didn't respond to that, I have started Commons:Categories for discussion/2020/07/Category:Regions of Spain. - Jmabel ! talk 00:24, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

False, I've responded multiple times, but don't expect a response to the minute, I've responded in correct time ! See just before the message (that I've move below my response posted well before your message)!!! verdy_p (talk) 00:28, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Rute, Córdoba[edit]

Why "(Spain)" rather than ", Spain"? That's a deprecated way of doing disambiguation because brackets mean "is a", and commas mean "is at" or "in", just like any ordinary address? Makes no sense to do that, sorry. Rodhullandemu (talk) 16:22, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Because in Spain disambiguation suffixes are in parentheses; commas are used mostly in US.

This is like other communities and provinces of Spain, and many other places in Spain using parentheses, this is an exception I dfound and I'm unifying the navigation for Spain. verdy_p (talk) 16:24, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, if Spain does it like that. The UK uses commas, though. Rodhullandemu (talk) 16:58, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Verdy p, Rodhullandemu is right. Most of the categories relating to places in Spain use the coma and not the parenthesis. The subcategories have to follow the parent category. You are creating a number of subcategories that don't match the parent category. For instance:

Category:Maps of municipalities in the province of Cuenca (Spain). The parent category is "province of Cuenca". The city of Cuenca does need desambiguation because there are many Cuencas around the world, but there is only one province of Cuenca.
Same for the province of Toledo and the province of Guadalajara.
The province of Córdoba is "province of Córdoba, Spain" and not "province of Córdoba (Spain)". The cities follow the same system: it is "Córdoba, Argentina" and "Córdoba, Spain".

Please don't change the pattern now because there are literrally hundreds of subcategories that will need to be changed. Regards, tyk (talk) 21:10, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The scheme ins Spain uses parentheses; other countries may have different shemes (including in English, see above). verdy_p (talk) 22:50, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Provinces of Spain[edit]

Verdy p, what on Earth is this? Why are you inventing the name of provinces and using old names that have not been in used for almost 50 years? This template makes no sense whatsoever. Regards, tyk (talk) 17:46, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't invent them, they are all from Wikidata (shortnames are taken from their capital city, when this does not match, in the Basque Country where they have theior own name, this name is also shown and also comes from Wikidata).

If there are bad names in some languages, fix Wikidata. The template was just internationalized with Template:Label and no longer uses Template:LangSwitch for all. It is easier to manage and translate. Note: There are various alternate aliases detected as secondary names they have lower priority, the first alias found is used each time for the target link; the same label is displayed for those aliases. verdy_p (talk) 17:47, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't and never has been any province called Las Palmas de Gran Canaria. There is the province of Las Palmas.

There isn't any province of Castellón de la Plana. There is the province of Castellón (or Castelló in Catalan). These are not alternate or short names. They just don't exist.

Capital cities are irrelevant. The provinces are not known by their capital city. There isn't a province of Bilbao. There is Biscay.

Logroño, Pamplona, Santander... don't exist anymore as provinces. Those territories are now called something else.

This template makes no sense for anyone born less than 45 years ago. tyk (talk) 18:04, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The current names are also displayed; if you want I can remove the capital city name which is also displayed... verdy_p (talk) 18:05, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. As you see I did not invent anything (these are exactly the same wikidata items!). These names of capital cities appeared as I was internationalizing the template and looking for Wikidata items. verdy_p (talk) 18:11, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: It's not possible to get the "short names": Las Palmas, Castellon; they are not in Wikidata that uses long forms, and the template needs short forms. This is a limitaiton of the current Wikidata module that does not allow selection the short form (either from the city, or from the province). I was searching and did not find any way working for now. this is something I will fix in the Wikidata module so that it selects the correct property and not the default labels of wikidata items (but for now selecting a property does not work as it returns ALL translations in a long list, the specified language is ignored and there's still no fallback support to select a aingle language when the requested language has no translation; this is in my TODO list for Wikidata and this bnug was also reported and discussed elsewhere for multilingual properties that have multiple values of type "single-language text"; this is a technical limitation that will be solved).

Note that for various provinces I already fixed Wikidata entries as much as possible in various languages to get consistant results and correct display also in Wikidata Infoboxes.

But as there are still some incosistant names appearing, the city name was also shown. This is no longer the case, I jsut removed them.

Fixing the "short" names of provinces (without unnecessary prefixes like "province of" which should be in aliases of Wikidata items, not in the default labels) is something I passed a long time to fix them, before applying the change using Wikidata labels in the template. verdy_p (talk) 18:16, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For the two remaining "short names" (Castellon and Las Palmas), this is fixed in Wikidata items for their provinces (I used short names by default for the labels, added long names as aliases, added the missing description specifying it is a province where this was not specified for existing short names).

There was no translated name at all in the template itself. Then I aplied the change of Wikidata item ID used for these two. This should be OK now. verdy_p (talk) 19:09, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please be civil[edit]

català ∙ čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ Simple English ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ +/−

You are acting in an uncivil manner. Please remain civil and don't resort to making personal attacks or instigate edit wars. If your behaviour is not moderated, you may be blocked from further editing.

— Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 02:59, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeff G.: Franchement non. J'ai été accusé dès le début par un contributeur ci-dessus (Jmabel) pour de fausses raisons, comme si je ne lui avais pas répondu de façon tout à fait correcte. J'ai du me défendre car il est allé s'en plaindre (ailleurs) avec cette même mauvaise raison, prétextant que je ne lui avais pas répondu. C'est lui qui s'est montré grossier au départ, je n'ai fait que me défendre tout en restant correct avec lui et même convenant être d'accord avec lui sure certains points dont il n'a pas tenu compte du tout, comme si je n'avais pas tenu compte de ses remarques

Quelle incivilité ai-je commise ? Je n'ai pas le droit de me défendre face à une accusation fausse et la volonté exprimée par lui d'ignorer ma réponse (qu'il a finalement admis avoir lu mais décidé lui-même d'ignorer) ? Je n'ai pas eu le temps de négocier qui que ce soit, il a décidé tout seul (voir ci-dessus) qu'il ne voulait pas trouver d'accord du tout.

Je réponds aussi dans un temps très raisonnable (contrairement à la plainte qui a été déposée prétextant que je ne répondais pas du tout pour une réponse faite 15 minutes après sa question, alors qu'il est allé se plaindre ensuite 9 heures plus tard, bien plus tardivement que moi).

Si quelqu'un a fait l'objet "d'attaques personnelles" c'est bien moi la victime, et Jmbabel l'agresseur quand il est allé se plaindre ailleurs d'une prétendue "non-réponse" de ma part. Et ma réponse qu'il a ignorée était parfaitement polie et répondait même à sa demande de proposer une solution, ce que j'ai fait justement en 15 minutes (mais il n'en a pas tenu compte en allant se plaindre 9 heures plus tard sans aucun autre message de sa part : il est le seul à avoir rompu à deux reprises la discussion, et le seul à avoir mélangé l'ordre des discussions pour faire valoir sa position, un ordre que j'ai du rétablir du fait de sa plainte en remettant son message dans l'ordre de publication).

Un autre utilisateur ensuite s'est montré incivil ci-dessus dès son premier post, mais j'ai aussi tenu compte de sa remarque quand même (en lui expliquant au fur et à mesure les corrections). Il n'a pas répondu, donc je pense que ça lui convient. Je ne suis pas "sourd" à ce qu'on me dit, j'essaye de tenir compte des avis autant que possible et corriger ce qui est possible.

Bref, je n'ai agressé personne... Je suis le seul à pouvoir me plaindre valablement de l'attitude et du mensonge (répété) de Jmbabel qui déforme la réalité.

verdy_p (talk) 03:05, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: j'ai répondu à nouveau dans le NoA board (en anglais) avec les diffs pour prouver que Jmbabel a tord et n'a strictemetn aucune raison de se plaindre d'une prétendue "non-réponse" de ma part. Les timestamps sont clairs, même s'il a posté sa plainte au dessus de ma réponse que je lui avait faite, avec une solution possible avec qu'il m'avait lui-même demandé de proposer, et ma réponse acceptait un de ses arguments pour avancer sur le sujet. Alors je pense qu'il n'a tout bonnement pas compris ma réponse mais au lieu de demander des précisions, il a préféré se plaindre ailleurs. verdy_p (talk) 03:47, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries, wheel warring[edit]

Please provide a reason after you are given a reason when reverted. Strakhov (talk) 07:22, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the category: it is for completeness of the navigation. Even if the province overlaps the community, it is along other provinces sorted by community. verdy_p (talk) 07:24, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You did a pretty bizarre work when recategorising provinces and regions and so on categories of Spain. Anyway,

1) Category:Municipalities in Spain by province by autonomous community:

(Regardless nor Ceuta nor Melilla are "autonomous communities" ("provinces" neither).)

...wasn't easier just creating "Municipalities in Spain by province" and "Municipalities in Spain by autonomous community" instead of that mess?

2) I do not understand the point of segregating "Provinces of Spain" and "Other autonomous communities" (sic, since the previous ones are not "automous communities", it is a pretty strange epigraph) in Template:Provinces of Spain, since the "other autonomous communities"'s full name is not included (it reads Madrid and not "Community of Madrid" and "Murcia" and not "Region of Murcia", so describing them just as "provinces" is OK).

3) Honestly, what did you do to that template?

4) Regardless whether Ceuta and Melilla should be included in that template or not, the epigraph "Autonomous cities" should not be included in "Template:Regions of Spain" or "Template:Provinces of Spain" when there aren't categories of that cities already created. Strakhov (talk) 07:42, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

They are not "segregated". It just shows those that are considered but as communities and provinces, unified (even if there are two governing bodies on the same territory).

This makes this explicit, they are all in the same navbox. But they don't subcategorize the same way: their category content is then very different. verdy_p (talk) 07:46, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note that various categories by province by community were already existing. There were also categories list the "full lists" by name where there no split by province or by comarca.

I'm just unifying that as various categories are defective in the navigation. verdy_p (talk) 07:49, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Red links are there because I used (temporarily) the "all=1" option to show all links (including missing ones that have to be resolved, or disambiguated with the unified non-ambiguous name). These redlinks won't stay forver, I'll remove later the all=1 option whose purpose is always temporary. verdy_p (talk) 07:51, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It was better organised before your edits. Yes, they are segregated: first a line with "Provinces of Spain" and then a line with "Other autonomous communities". As said, the second epigraph is just wrong. I could understand separating Ceuta and Melilla in that template with the "Autonomous cities" bit, since they are not provinces. But "Madrid" and "Murcia" and "Asturias" are indeed provinces and there is no benefit in creating a separate line (with an incorrect epigraph) in a template precisely aimed to include "provinces". Strakhov (talk) 07:54, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

They are not in separate lines (no break at all in the navbox), they are in the same list, there's only a title in the middle of the list. verdy_p (talk) 07:56, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You can call it a separate line, a separate list, a separate section, the same section with a title in the middle, whatever: the point is the same. It does break the alphabetic order and brings errors/confusion with your tags (the aforementioned "Other autonomous communities" thing). Strakhov (talk) 07:58, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

They are not the same type (not the same organization). What they have ain common is a deputation, but there's no separate territory, and most things are not "delegated" by the autonomous community. You can suggest another label ("Same territory as autonomous community" ? Can you think of a short indication?). But these are not really like other provinces splitting the communities. I know that provinces have limited power now in Spain and their power is even more reduced in communities that are not split.

May be another way would be to add a mark like like "^‡" after their name, calling for a footnote at the bottom of the navbox. verdy_p (talk) 08:09, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I still think there's no need of identifying them as "not only provinces but, hey, also autonomous communities" in a template destined to include ...provinces (simple as that), but yep, that mark would be better than the "Provinces of Spain" vs "Other autonomous communities" solution. These templates (provinces, regions) are mostly about a geographical distribution of files. To classificate churches, people, streets, (...) in different territories (geographical areas). The "power thing" you mention is mostly irrelevant when it comes to the uses of this template. Strakhov (talk) 08:31, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK I'll use the mark. But note that correct sorting is not warrantied across languages: the lsit is ordered statically (to change this by language, the tempalte may be converted using Module:Countries which supports sorting by language). For now I'm terminating a few things, and then I'll add the small mark and a footer note (like for navboxes for countries by continents).

verdy_p (talk) 08:35, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK. IMHO they should not try to convey the subtleties of Spanish State, it's OK with them just not including blatant errors (like calling "Ceuta" a province or a CC.AA). If someone wants to understand the political organisation of Spain and their institutions (gobierno de comunidad autónoma, diputación provincial, comunidad autónoma uniprovincial, estatuto de autonomía...), please read Wikipedia. This is a Commons template facilitating navigation between different areas of Spain, that should be as simple as possible, but not simpler. Yeah, I noticed Vizcaya displays between Barcelona and Burgos when selecting Spanish as language in Commons. Strakhov (talk) 08:49, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Common is also educative. And not understanding the subtleties brings to incorrect categorization of various contents based on false assumptions. As small note to recall it to all viewers is useful. What is obvious for you may not be so obvious for others which may not immediately see the difference (even if they know it or have read it). As well this form allows simpler management of contents without having to consult a reference each time because of ambiguities.

Navigating in Commons is not so easy. I'll probably add the suppot of sorting using Module:Countries. But immediately a small note should be visible, including for editors. verdy_p (talk) 08:54, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As said, supposedly trying to be educative you were being "un-educative", since you were converting something that was correct (calling "Madrid" a province of Spain) into something is wrong (calling Madrid an "other autonomous community of Spain", as if the previous ones were too). Anyway, what are the false assumptions and incorrect categorizations we are supposedly dealing with when calling "Madrid", "Asturias", "La Rioja", "Murcia" and "Cantabria" provinces of Spain? Could you pose some examples to understand what are you worried about? Strakhov (talk) 09:06, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Community of Madrid or Province of Madrid, this is the same entity, and in the list of provinces, where the link will go to the community, it makes no real sense to add again "Community of" or "Provice of" in the individual label when the heading already says this is a list of provinces (or province-like entities): it is not specified at all for all the other provinces. Both expressions "Community of Madrid" and "Province of Madrid" exist officially (but for different governing bodies with different missions).

I'm just concerned by the subcategorization system: if we navigate there, we won't find a list of provinces but directly a list of municipalities (or other sub-provincial entities). This is also a helper when creating new categories that their content must be managed differently. as I said, I'll use the mark and all will be fine for you. Later I'll convert it with Module:Countries to get the correct sort order for all languages. verdy_p (talk) 09:14, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Province of Cuenca[edit]

Regardless the typo, After 12 years with that name, IMHO that move (specially when the title in en.wikipedia is "Province of Cuenca" and the main category in commons "Province of Cuenca") would merit at the very least a COM:CfD. I'd revert that. Strakhov (talk) 08:59, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There's been frequent misuse and confusion with the city of Ecuador when categorizing files. The disambiguation is used in most wikis, as both are cities probably equally important.

Note ther typo was unexpected, it existed for less than one minute. verdy_p (talk) 09:03, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also there are already lot of categories in Commons using thr disambiguation suffix. verdy_p (talk) 09:04, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There's apparently no province of Cuenca in Ecuador. The province the Ecuadorian city of Cuenca lies in is called Azuay. The dissambiguator is needed with the city, not with the province. Anyway, as contested move, it should go to COM:CFD. Strakhov (talk) 09:09, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The only wiki including "Spain" in the name of this province is ia.wiki. Strakhov (talk) 09:13, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think about the city name : the Ecuadorian city is 6 trimes more important than the Spanish one. And historically it was also part of the former Spanish Empire, and for biographic references, or artistic references, when "Cuenca" is used, it must be clear and they must not be confused (the Ecuadorian city was even named after the Spanish city, by people that have lived in both!). verdy_p (talk) 09:17, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also I found disambiguatiojn used in various subcategories. Don't look at just the first root category... verdy_p (talk) 09:21, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Again: the city name is already disambiguated (the subcategories of the city should indeed be moved to "...(Spain)" or "..., Spain": for example "Category:Buildings in Cuenca", but "Populated places in the province of Cuenca" is not related to the city/municipality). If you want to change the name of the category referring to the province in Spain, please open a CFD on the main category. If you want to give the main "Cuenca" to the city in Ecuador because of its 6x population: same. Anyway, every category name should be changed, not only this one about "populated places". I'm gonna leave the things as they were before you moved the category. Then you can start the category for discussion. Please, follow Commons procedures and stop being too bold. Cheers. Strakhov (talk) 09:24, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And yeah, it's a good idea for you to check subcategories' name. Here the first level ones:

Category:Architecture of the province of Cuenca‎

Category:Cemeteries in the province of Cuenca‎

Category:Culture of the province of Cuenca‎

Category:Economy of the province of Cuenca‎

Category:Geography of the province of Cuenca‎ <- click here and check the name of the sister subcategories of Category:Populated places in the province of Cuenca.

Category:History of the province of Cuenca‎

Category:Nature of the province of Cuenca‎

Category:People of the province of Cuenca‎

Category:Signs in the province of Cuenca‎

Category:Society of the province of Cuenca‎

Category:Transport in the province of Cuenca‎

Category:Views of the province of Cuenca

Strakhov (talk) 09:40, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've checked a number of them. Until I found that disambiguation was used at some level (I can't remember where exactly as this was done several weeks or months ago).

The navbox takes these disambiguation into account when they found them, prior to use the non-disambiguated name (which be the only existing one). And in several cases, the non-disabmiguated name was in Ecuador which took the ambiguous pagename first (and given this Ecuadorian city is 6 times more populated, it may happen at any time). Ecuadorian contributors don't necessarily know that there's a smaller Spanish city than theirs. Cuenca is wellknown only in Spain. For many others, Cuenca is first known in Ecuador. Even if the city of Ecuador is located in "province de l'Azuay", many of them also designate it as "province de Cuenca", because it's its capital, and even its canton subdivision (where the city is located) occupies a very large part of their province. The Ecuadorian city is growing fast. Province of Azuay is also confusing for them because, when abbreviated it may designate the whole departement. For them there's no ambiguity if they name it "province of Cuenca" even if it's not the formal name, it's colloquial and somewhat frequent. verdy_p (talk) 09:56, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The disambiguation "(Spain)" is used with some categories referring to the Spanish city (not every one of them and that should probably be corrected, as it should with the ones related to the city in Ecuador too), not with the Spanish province. Anyway, as said, you disagree with "Province of Cuenca" -> you open a CfD to rename to "Province of Cuenca (Spain)" or "Province of Cuenca, Spain". I do not think the hypothetical confusion between "Province of Cuenca" as "The province the city of Cuenca in Ecuador belongs to, which happens to be known as Azuay" is strong enough to add a dissambiguator in the Spanish one. And, so far, almost every wikipedia thought the same way, sorry. Strakhov (talk) 10:31, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh. Now I see you were the one moving "Cuenca" to "Cuenca (Spain)" this morning. I do not contest that move (as said above, "Cuenca" is indeed ambiguous), but moving the main category and leaving the subcategories as they were is a problematic edit. With regard to the comma vs parentheses in Commons with Spanish locations (I see a thread above mentioning this), when the disambiguator is a city I think using the comma is more usual. When it's a country I'd say the situation is more divided. As long as you do not start to mass-move categories for buildings, streets and so on already using commas (without reaching a wide consensus), I'd not object the "(Spain)" instead of ", Spain" for the Spanish city of Cuenca, for now. Strakhov (talk) 13:39, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The comma is rare for cities and all other populated placs, that use parentheses most often, the comma is used inside parentheses when there's a need for several successive disambiguations, including a region or entity name, and "Spain" for the country). What is common in UK, US, is not what I've seen in Spain (which also uses the comma for suffixed articles in category keys). Many external articles and references in Spain use parentheses, including in their official names when needed (and in multiple languages, where appropriate depending on regions: Spanish/Castillian, Catalan/Valencian, French, Aragonese, Basque, Asturian, Galician, Extremaduran). I jsut used what I saw in the relevant categories. Even reports from ESTAT in English, or bilingual in Spanish/Eglish (built for Eurostat) are using parentheses... Engliush has both conventions valid, the usage is just country dependant. In Spain commas are problematic because there are official toponyms that are enumerating 3 items of more with commas, that are not used for disambiguation (the same is true in France for some intercommunal entities, like this exists also in Spain for mancomunidades). verdy_p (talk) 14:16, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are simply wrong. Maybe you think you know more than you actually know. I have categorised thousands of files in Commons, many of them related to Spain. And to this point I know a little of how things are done around here. And with regard to buildings and streets both forms are used, and I'd say the comma is more frequent. Category:Churches in the province of Lugo (mixed). Category:Streets in Madrid by name (only commas). Category:Churches in Barcelona (mostly parentheses), Category:Palaces in Seville (mostly commas), Category:Streets in Casco Antiguo district (only commas), Category:Churches in the province of Salamanca (mostly commas). I know, perfectly, in Spanish language the parentheses should be used preferably (and I correct that every day in Spanish Wikipedia, because the commas are an "anglicism" and es.wikipedia is written in Spanish). But Commons categories happen to be written in English, not Spanish. In Spanish, "(Spain)" is written "(España)", with a ñ. Strakhov (talk) 15:00, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

After all I'm not asking you so much. Since there is no clear preference in Commons, I only beg you to not randomly and massively move already-existing-disambiguators to your personal preference without reaching wide consensus (and then, if consensus is reached to use parentheses in Spanish-related-categories, every category name should be moved, preferably by bot). Is it that much? Strakhov (talk) 15:14, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You said it yourself! There's no consensus but for the most imporant categories (communities, provinces, municipalities) the navigation uses parentheses most of the time. I cannot do everything in subcategoies by topic, bu the nav templates already take into account for possible aliases and find relevant links. But where navboxes are not working and this can be corrected for unified navigation we can add the missing redirects or reverse some. Resolving redirects is not easy. Many templates are inconsistant about this, and I'm trying to make the navigation working everywhere.

Thematic subtopics (churches or similar...) may follow, but I cannot do all at once (and forcing such thing by bots is almost impossible as there are too many inconsistancies, this would create a tons of erroneous things. I fix them one by one, manually, hopefully without breaking the existing content. I fo a lot of searches for that, and make a lot of checks after to see if this has broken something (I use various tools like "what links to this page", I check if important translations are correct (notably if labels are coming from Wikidata, I need to check if the English term is present for fallbacks, that entities are not confused, that Spanish is there too, along as some relevant regional languages).

Fixing everything at once is simply impossible, so aliases are kept and searched for: this preserves the compatibility of links, before things get actually renamed. I do not perform mass edits, all is done page by page manually, and as much as possible I synchronize this across related pages, so they are consistant and more predictable, easier to change later consistantly. After this step, bots will be able to operate if you decide to change a naming convention (which still does not exist for now).

May be you don't see it, but you should already remark that there are more horizontal navboxes working now than there was before and horizontal navigation is already simpler in many categories, and that categroies that should have been populated are now populated correctly with the complete lists and not partial lists.

It's difficult to do, and this cannot be automated, as this requires many incremental steps and many long searches. verdy_p (talk) 11:35, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Note: This description has been identified as biased or incorrect: the navigation uses parentheses most of the time. ": citation needed. What I said was pretty clear: please "do not start to mass-move categories for buildings, streets and so on already using commas (without reaching a wide consensus)". Please stop doing this. Regardless you "cannot do all at once", you get consensus first, you massively move hundreds of categories later. In that order. Categories of that province happen to use ", Spain". Same with the city. Same with Toledo (city). Same with Guadalajara (city). And so on. Strakhov (talk) 16:24, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Look at most categories (including the most important onces listing municipalities in larger areas): most of them use parentheses. It may happen that a few other thematic subcategories (XXX in city name) use inconsistant naming that does not match the parent category name. But this is clear when we look at list of municipalties by name for provinces and comarcas.

"citation needed" ? I gave the inidication where to look at. You are jsut looking at few subcategories in that single city...

Apparently you don't care about being consistant horizontally with other cities. I've also avoided passing through redirecting pages. I was based on a pure statistical view, which would express the opinion of majority of existing users (note also that Spanish Wikipedia also use parentheses for cities in Spain, just like most other Wikipedias; commas may be used however in a few other languages, but most often only Wikis in English; and Commons follows the local conventions of the places, as much as possible for naming; the only exception being when there are battles between names in different local languages, but still this only applies to the names and not the disambiguation/precision suffixes). You gave the exampel with "city" also in parentheses in your example... using parentheses is the most common convention in Commons, even outside place names. Commas cause problems in place names as they can also be part of the name itself, this is just an artefact of the orthographic concventions used in US (or UK) because their place names don't have commas and it because the convention used to annotate the state name (or abbreviation) after the city name, derived from US and British uses for postal address formats. verdy_p (talk) 06:50, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Apparently you don't care about being consistant horizontally with other cities". What cities? "Look at most categories (including the most important onces listing municipalities in larger areas): most of them use parentheses" you claim many things, but you do not back those statements with facts. I linked you a province and three province capitals (main categories, not thematic subcategories) (In fact, the only capital of province in Spain using "(Spain)" right now is the one you moved a few days ago: "Cuenca" to "Cuenca (Spain)"). As said, do not massively move categories (as you have been doing) without reaching consensus COM:CFD. Doing something manually does not prevent the fact of doing that massively. Strakhov (talk) 14:49, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think your TPA should be used for such replies, so I am pinging AFBorchert. — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 07:45, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeff G.: I do not mind as I think that answers to talk page questions are ok and as this is unrelated to the conflict which led to the block. But I agree with Strakhov that a consensus must be reached first before starting unilaterally with big-scale category moves per COM:CATMOVE. --AFBorchert (talk) 07:56, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I did not "mass-move". Only a SINGLE category is related here ! verdy_p (talk) 09:55, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked for a duration of 1 month[edit]

You have been blocked from editing Commons for a duration of 1 month for the following reason: per this COM:AN/U thread..

If you wish to make useful contributions, you may do so after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may add {{unblock|(enter your reason here) ~~~~}} below this message explaining clearly why you should be unblocked. See also the block log. For more information, see Appealing a block.

العربية ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ euskara ∙ français ∙ Gaeilge ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ Simple English ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ suomi ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ हिन्दी ∙ বাংলা ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ไทย ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

--AFBorchert (talk) 15:17, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I still contest the nature of the decision and the reason given by someone that made false statements that were incorrectly checked (notably the history that he mixed by confusing dates and mixing order of posts in threads. Which made the situation very hard to analyze. This should have never occured because I respected the normal time to react (I did not ignore any message as it was stated). And the contestation came weeks after the changes in an nrelated communication without even notifying me correctly.

This block was unjustified with valid reasons, and should have never happened, as I fully respected the existing policies. I was bypassed in all decisions and the issue was incorrectly supervized/checked. And I was not offered any chance of being requalified by any independant party (not even the existing mediation solutions). verdy_p (talk) 19:53, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

'eta[edit]

First, thanks for your contributions to the project! I happened to come across File:Tahitian 'eta.png while normalizing punctuation on English Wikipedia, and I'm curious how this image was produced if 'eta doesn't have a Unicode code point? Were you using some other character encoding, or a Unicode character not officially designated for 'eta? I'm wondering if there's a good on-wiki solution for representing 'eta more accurately than just using an 'okina. -- Beland (talk) 16:31, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It was not produced by using an unicode font directly, but Using Linux Libertine to type the approximating glyph of the okina (6-shaped vertically), then turned it 90 degrees clockwise. The result is more similar in fact to a spacing circumflex ^ than to any existing quotation mark. That 90°-turned form was seen in various artistic products from French Polynesia (Tahiti, Marquises islands, and Tuamotu archipelago), Wallis and Futuna islands, and New-Caledonia (Grande-Terre and north-east islands), which consistently made that letter oriented horizontally, rather than vertically.

For now the eta and okina are still unified (considered distinctive glyph variants of the same letter, as they both represent the same Polynesian/Melanesian glottal stop (also found in several other Malay languages, including various dialects of Indonesian, Javanese; in New Caledonia, people speaking Javanese even use this sign, even if Malay or Javanese don't use it in their national form). For Hawaii, there are samples too, but no formal choice was made about the glyph: I think Unicode made the choice to unify the two signs only because of Hawaiian (probably a too strong influence from the US body in the ISO subcomity, and less concerns from Indonesia, Malaysia and even France as they promote other languages; may be New Zealand would have had a voice as this turned letter is also found in Maori).

So Okina/Eta has two forms, no separate encoding (may be just a variant encoding for the vertical, or horizontal; several fonts exist that map only one of the two forms).

Note : I created these images 13 years ago ! And note that theses were created simply as PNG images at that time (13 years ago, SVG image editors were very poor and produced inconsistant results across renderers, including on this wiki). verdy_p (talk) 17:10, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Comarcas of the Land of Valencia by name[edit]

Hi Verdy p. Why have to moved Category:Comarques of the Land of Valencia by name to Category:Comarcas of the Land of Valencia by name? It doesn't seems that it has been debated or anything.--TaronjaSatsuma (talk) 14:43, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker)@TaronjaSatsuma: This move should be undone; please ping me whenever a change from "comarque" to "comarca" is discussed in the context of cat renames. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 15:39, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Tuvalkin: Thanks for stalking ;). I'll ping you when done.--TaronjaSatsuma (talk) 16:00, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't "Camarcas" the normal plural used in English? "Comarques" is for Catalan... verdy_p (talk) 12:58, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To the best of my knowledge, "Camarcas" does not exist in any language. "Comarcas" is Castilian Spanish; "Comarques" is Valenciano/Catalan. I am not aware of any word being particularly common for this in English, so it seems to me that for Valencia we should stick to the Valenciano plural rather than impose a Castilian Spanish plural. - Jmabel ! talk 15:02, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Valenciano is the same as Catalan, to the point where the respective language academies put out the same dictionary, differing only on what to call the language (valencià or català). There are regional dialectical differences, but no particular break at the border between the two autonomous regions.) - Jmabel ! talk 15:05, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jmabel: What is "Valenciano"? The word you seek is "Valencian", the English demonym to refer to this city, its province, and its region, dully derived from Latinate "ualentianus" and akin to Castilian (a.k.a. Spanish) "valenciano" and Catalan "valencià" — as you seem to know very well. Why then use a Castilian (a.k.a. Spanish) word in an English sentence, especially given the delicate context of this matter? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 15:15, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Tuvalkin: Apologies: a word I rarely have occasion to use in English and often have occasion to use in Spanish. You are of course correct. - Jmabel ! talk 22:11, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Edit conflict) The (faux) English word "comarca" is only used in the context of locations where it matches the local language, akin to other (problematic, exotifying) words like "oblast" etc. This case is compounded by the fact that the singular matches the Spanish form but the plural does not, and this being about Valencia with its specific language policy issues, it would have been wisest to just leave it alone and avoid renaming from "comarques" to "comarcas". Please note also that this level of geographic subdivision is used only in the three Catalan-speaking regions of Spain, by their regional governments, and generally ignored by the central government. So, the more I look at it, the more it looks like that “homogenizing” the plural of this faux English word by adding a trailing "s" (which is not how all plurals form in authentic English words form, anyway) is to be done here for really little gain and at the cost of considerable hostility from most editors who would be using the affected categories. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 15:08, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Then explain why English Wikipedia uses comarcas everywhere (and it is not alone in many English sources). And the term also varies in translations across Spanish regions. It's true that in France it's often spelled "comarques", but this is ambiguous with another unrelated meaning (cobranding in English) and "comarcas" is also used for this reason, borrowed from Castillan, or Occitan where both terms are also used with no clear consensus. In Corsican, "comarcas" is also used like in Italian and Sardinian (including in the small area to the northwest of Sardinia where Catalan is spoken). In the areas where Catalan and Occitan coexist, "comarcas" is more frequent. So really it seems that both terms "comarcas" and "comarques" are valid in Catalan. I don't agree with your conclusion for English, it is not "faux English", as the term also designates the former subdivbision of Portugal, and only "comarcas" is used in Portuguese (in Portugal and Brazil which also had this type of subdivision and in fact many former Spanish colonies as well; the term "comarcas" has then survived in English for centuries, independantly of the situation in Catalunya, Valencia, or even the Balearic islands which was occupid by Arabs for much longer time than Catalunya and that explains the dialectal differences persisting today in Catalan). You cannot restrict the term only to its modern meaning in Catalunya, where the "recatalonisation" of the language is stronger than everywhere, including for terms that were always part of the language but incorrectly viewed today as being "Castillan" and improper, and we are discussing only avbout the term used in English, which is not official at all in Catalunya). verdy_p (talk) 22:57, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, typical Verdy obfuscation: Attempting to move the goal posts by goading the others with a torrent of assorted, off-topic stuff — some right, some wrong, and all of it unrelated and unnecessary. This may impress some, but tl;dr — boring, in a nutshell. So you are knowldgeable about this stuff?, good for you; however I am too and this drivel is not impressing me at all. Maybe this general subject would make for a pleasant discussion around a cafe table with some Estrella bottles on it (or maybe not), but here-now it is not helpful at all. This is your usual reaction when challenged in your edits, and it’s deterimental to anything constructive. It may be your knee jerk reaction, or may be a deliberate tactic — eitherway, it has to stop. In short: Was it a good move to "comarques" to "comarcas" in Valencian cats? No, it wasn’t. Undo it, and move on. Or keep digging. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 12:16, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"knee jerk reaction", "obfuscation". Hmmm... Do you know the real meaning of this last term, and how this incorrect use is just a personnal attack and abusive behavior ? I've not disguised things, I've impersonated no one, I did not use any tactic, I speak for myself and give my oponion, freely, and in a friendly way, so don't raise the tone please, keep calm. I did not attack anyone here like you just did. I have the same right as you to give my opinion, I have the same right as you to convence people, so respect me and other people, this is a friendly talk page. And nothing above was out-of-topic as you claim. You may not be convinced, this is your right, I am not forcing anyone. Do you know the etiquette policies of Wikimedia? If you react so agressively (abusively IMHO for the Wikimedia directives), this invalidates all your arguments. And your agressive reaction is absolutely not constructive by any way.

And why you regional right would be more important that the international right, how can you just claim that Catalunya regulate the English language?

And there's already a consensus on Commons, which is to solve name conflicts using English for topic about regions that are evidently multilingual. Catalynya is multilingual. And this is not a topic about the Catalan language itself (and alone), and even the Catalan language is not limited to the Spanish Catalunya (or Land of Valencia). verdy_p (talk) 16:14, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Verdy p/archive17

Contents

{{Unknown}}[edit]

Template:Subject by century[edit]

Regions of Spain[edit]

Category:Rute, Córdoba[edit]

Template:Provinces of Spain[edit]

Please be civil[edit]

Edit summaries, wheel warring[edit]

Province of Cuenca[edit]

You have been blocked for a duration of 1 month[edit]

'eta[edit]

Category:Comarcas of the Land of Valencia by name[edit]

Navigation menu

User talk:Verdy p/archive17

{{Unknown}}[edit]

Template:Subject by century[edit]

Regions of Spain[edit]

Category:Rute, Córdoba[edit]

Template:Provinces of Spain[edit]

Please be civil[edit]

Edit summaries, wheel warring[edit]

Province of Cuenca[edit]

You have been blocked for a duration of 1 month[edit]

'eta[edit]

Category:Comarcas of the Land of Valencia by name[edit]

Navigation menu

Search