Commons:Disputes noticeboard/Archive: Catalonia

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

This page is for writing about a longterm dispute involving primarily user Juiced lemon and administrator Martorell.

Conflict background reading

Suggested restrictions to be placed

  1. Both users shall not engage in any further disruptive editting, which includes, but is not limited to revert warring.
  2. Both users shall not change categories of images, galleries or categories without leaving an explanation on the talk page.
  3. Both users shall remain civil, which includes no personal attacks.
  4. Juiced lemon shall not revert edits without a appropriate edit summary.
  5. Martorell shall not use his administrative privileges against Juiced lemon, but ask for administrator intervention on the appropriate subsection of Administrators' noticeboard.

Breaking of these restrictions will cause a temporarily ban, to be discussed by administrators other than Martorell. Sysop abuse per 5. by Martorell may cause his desysopping.

Proposing. -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:18, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

But we still don't have a solution -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:18, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Suggested restrictions to be placed on administrators

  • No use of any admin powers (moving, deleting, blocking, protecting) to be used on any page or file relating to this topic.

By location category scheme

I create this section because the section Category name suggestions evade the main issue: what territory must we choose to categorize images, and other multimedia files which are classified by their placenames (Commons:By location category scheme), when these placenames are in the Autonomous community of Catalonia?

Don't tell me: “it's obvious, this territory must be the Autonomous community of Catalonia”, because that's precisely the cause of this dispute.

Look at these versions of Category:Catalonia:

The text (and the map in the first case) undoubtedly indicate that the subject of the category is the Autonomous community of Catalonia. That is what Martorell refuse to recognize; he never suggested to rename it, therefore the category name is a secondary issue.

The purpose of Martorell is to change the subject of this category, to a territory called en:Principality of Catalonia in the English Wikipedia. But, all he is doing is muddle, since the categories : Category:Autonomous communities of Spain | Category:Ancient Crown of Aragon | Category:France cannot suit neither to the Autonomous community of Catalonia, nor to the Principality of Catalonia.

Here, somme examples of the mess that Martorell and his acolytes made in other related categories:

Regarding this issue, my suggestion is to set up a new rule to forbid systematic categorization of current places in former territories, or in cultural regions (language, religion, ethnic groups, etc.). Current places must be categorized according to current territories. --Juiced lemon 19:45, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Wich kind of territories? Administrative territories, you mean. Why should be "administrative concepts" more important that other concepts, such, cultural, geographical, political, linguistical, statistical, etc...? Why should'nt categories of several concepts to be cross-sectional? Cross-sectional criteria of categories is one of the most important advantages of MediaWiki software. But it seems to be too complicated for your viewpoint, or you like to have very simplest viewpoints. All we can be satisfied with each criteria of ours using several categories in cross-sectional, instead of you proposal to forbid something, I supposed so... No discussion. No agreement. --Joanot Martorell 20:41, 19 January 2007 (UTC) PD: Are users from wp:ca my "acolits"? Sigh...

Category name suggestions

Move one heading up

Problems arise because 'Catalonia' is ambiguous between the Autonomous Community of Catalonia and Principality of Catalonia (a general cultural region). English Wikipedia treats 'Catalonia' as the former, Catalan Wikipedia treats 'Catalunya' as the latter.

Solution 1: Abolish Catalonia

We can resolve this problem by treating the bare term 'Catalonia' as needing to be disambiguated. Category:Catalonia will become a disambiguation category, with links to category:Principality of Catalonia and category:Autonomous Community of Catalonia. --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 00:21, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I think that isn't the core of the problem created by Juiced lemon. The main question is, by exemple, everything that comes from French Catalonia, by exemple, a town (ie Perpinyà), a person (ie sciencist Francesc Aragó, also known as w:François Jean Dominique Arago), a mountain (ie Canigó), a castle (ie Category:Forteresse de Salses) etc... can be categorized as "cities and villages of Catalonia", "people from Catalonia", "mountains in Catalonia", or "castles in Catalonia" respectivelly?. Should we to use instead "everything of Principality of Catalonia"? The problem is that JL doesn't accept neither that all those things from Pyrénées Orientales are also Catalan and Catalonian nowadays, instead of it, it's only, and very only, French.
In other way, there's no Principality, it was abolished in 1714, and the term "Principality" is a extinct political concept. In spite of it, if the Principality wasn't abolished it wouldn't be correct, because Northern Catalonia was caught by French sovereignity in 1649, more than a century, before the abolition of the Principality of Catalonia by a French king. We're talking about "Catalonia", as a territorial-cultural concept, of all those every administrative units from any State that declares itself having Catalan identity. Nowadays there are two administrative concepts that shares one cultural concept, Catalonia: the Spanish Autonomous Community of Catalonia as "Comunitat Autònoma de Catalunya", and the French Department of Pyrénées Pyrénées as "Catalunya del Nord". --Joanot Martorell 08:32, 19 January 2007 (UTC) PD: Note that in w:Principality of Catalonia "Principality of Catalonia" and simply "Catalonia" are both synonyms.

Solution 2: Divide Catalonia

A solution would be completely abolishing both the Principality and the Autonomous Community, and redirect then for example, and then use Category:Northern Catalonia and Category:Southern Catalonia, of which the first one shall reside in France, and the latter one in Spain. Both shall be a subcategory of Category:Catalonia, which: choose one of these

Personally I don't like this solution, because it creates disambiguation, and somewhat ruins Commons category scheme. But if both parties can live with it, fine to me. -- Bryan (talk to me) 09:23, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

And about mountains, persons, everything, how would it be classified? Would be it "someone from Catalonia", o would be it always separated, "someone from Southern Catalonia" and "someone from Northern Catalonia"? I see it's nonsense for me, because Catalonians from south o from north don't differ themselves. --Joanot Martorell 09:45, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Solution 3: Make Catalonia related categories a cross-category function

This criteria find to use the most useful structure and categories for every user from every wikimedia project in every language.

It's also the criteria used by users from all Wikimedia's projects in Catalan, specially from w:ca:. It considers Catalonia as both "Autonomous Community of Catalonia" and Northern Catalonia (Pyrénées Orientales) at same time. It means, a territory based on a cultural concept.

All contents into Category:Catalonia will be classified into French and Spanish upper-categories (ie. "People from Catalonia" is a subcategory of "People from Spain" and "People from France", or "History of Catalonia" will belong to "History of Spain" and "History of Pyrénées-Orientales"). Category:Catalonia will belong to Category:Autonomous communities of Spain and to Category:Regions of France (same as Category:Occitània).

It also will respect duplicated structure on subjects related to Northern Catalonia (ie. Elna will be classified as Category:Cities and villages in Catalonia and Category:Cities and villages in Pyrénées-Orientales at same time, or Category:Canigou will be able to belong to Category:Mountains in Catalonia and Category:Mountains in Pyrénées-Orientales, at same time).

When classifying traditional comarcas it will belong to "Comarcas of Catalonia", but other divisions, such provinces, cantons, etc... will specify the upper administration (ie, "Provinces of Autonomous Community of Catalonia", "Cantons of the Pyrénées Orientales", etc.) Categories related to French administrative subdivision won't belong to Category:Catalonia but to Category:Pyrénées-Orientales.

It's not about to solve any problem artificially created by Juiced lemon because he simply dislikes ideologically (does he work usually on any Catalonian related thing in any project of Wikimedia?). It's about to make it more useful and easy for wikimedians. --Joanot Martorell 10:03, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't make sense to name the category "Principality of Catalonia", that was a traditional name disused nowadays and I consider "Autonomous community of Catalonia" redundant. Catalonia is an autonomous community as well as the rest of the communities in Spain and none of them are named like that. The rest of the world knows this community by its simple name, Catalonia, Catalunya or cataluña and I suppose we want people to be able to find it easily, they'll have the chance to read about its other names history in the respective wikipedias. Anna 02:42, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Solution 4: Apply the Commons rules

In Commons:Language policy, the rule is Categories are in English.

So, Category:Pain is not a ambiguous category, since we may not try to understand the word “Pain” in french language fr:Pain (Baguette.png), in German language de:Pain or in any of the hundreds of human languages other than English. Therefore, of course, we'll find the subject of Category:Pain in the English Wikipedia article en:Pain (that's only a confirmation, since the definition for the word Pain can be found in any English dictionary).

In this case, we don't care if the word in French language has a completly different meaning.

The Category:Catalonia case is similar: according to the rule, we have not to take care of any meaning of the word “Catalonia” other than in the English language. There is no ambiguity. Here, the dispute is the result of:

  1. the confusion that Martorell and some users have artificially created in deliberately miscategorizing categories and files regarding Catalonia and Pyrénées-Orientales.
  2. sloppiness in the application of the rule, though it was often discussed, but always upholded.

In an effective organization, a rule must be applied or amended. So, apply the rule, that's the solution.

--Juiced lemon 18:02, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

It would not be surprising to expect that many people who use the Catalonia categories also edit the Catalonian Wikipedia. Evidently there, "Catalonia" (Catalunya) has a different meaning than to other parts of the world. It is reasonable to consider adapting our rules to make their work easier and less confusing. We don't apply the rules blindly if they don't actually help the wiki. --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 06:14, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Geographic categories tend to be adapted to their local usage. Compare Category:Dunkerque, Sevilla, Zaragoza, Den Haag, Andalucia, Navarra with en:Dunkirk, en:Seville, en:Saragossa, en:The Hague, en:Andalusia, en:Navarre... the preceding unsigned comment is by (talk • contribs)
While titles for articles generally are free to choose language, and titles for categories are generally in English, here are exceptions for both articles and categories in case for plants/animals (latin binomial), speciality food (native), proper nouns (native), and titles of artworks and music (original language). See Commons:Language policy. Toponyms are proper nouns, and using the native form implies to recommend to use generally endonyms and not English exonyms. Categories related to non-English places is often used by endonym when this is the only title (ie, "Catalunya"), but to use the English exonym when the toponym is included in a sentence (ie, "Rivers in Catalonia"). This rule is too roughly, and here is an ongoing discussion about this language policy.
I don't understand why JL is always claiming that his criteria is Commons' criteria. Attending to Commons:Language policy, language for titles of articles are free to be chosen, and those articles related to places it's recommended to use native language. But he always reverts the following Catalonian places located in France:
I always (and users from ca:wp) wanted to respect both native names, but he seems to reject one of them. Is he doing it under any Commons criteria?. Isn't it showing a attitude of cultural discrimination?. Isn't it showing that he's doing it because of ideological reasons? Isn't it showing a lack of respect?. --Joanot Martorell

I think we have a clear rule and it should be clear that we follow it. Hence Category:Catalonia is about the autonomous region is Spain. If some people want to change this, they should first change the language and then Commons, not vice versa (we don't want Commons to be a forum of propaganda, do we?). Samulili 09:10, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Solution 5: Keep 'Catalonia' ambiguous, over-specify geographic subcats

New proposal. The Autonomous Community of Catalonia can generally be considered a subset of 'the general cultural region of Catalonia', i.e. anything that is true about the Autonomous Community is also true about the general cultural region. So for many subcategories of Category:Catalonia, the distinction is not important. That is, for culture, people, food, buildings, if they are in or of the Autonomous Community of Catalonia, they are also in or of the general cultural region of Catalonia.

The only categories where the distinction really matters are the geographic ones and possibly political/historical ones. So for these subcategories, we disambiguate them, ie. change them to 'X of the Autonomous Community of Catalonia' and make 'X of Catalonia' a redirect or disambiguation page.

For most subcategories the name won't need to change, so it won't be overly disruptive. --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 06:26, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Pfctdayelise, but I don't understand too much your proposal. Would you mind to show me several exemples, please?. --Joanot Martorell 16:58, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Any individual topic within Wikipedia; the web page without the top, bottom and side bars. Pages include articles, stubs, redirects, disambiguation pages, user pages, talk pages, documentation and special pages. (en:Wikipedia:Glossary)
Here we find again the fundamental principle for any encyclopedia: each article deal with a single topics. And a common feature in encyclopedias is to allocate suitable titles to articles in order to identify the topics, and to establish lists of articles (as in a thesaurus).
We don't write articles in Commons Wikimedia, but we classify media files by topics, and to easily find the files, we have to associate each page with a single topics, and to choose a suitable title to identify this single topics. When the topics is a encyclopedic one, we usually choose the title according to title of the matching article or matching category in the English Wikipedia.
Grounds to this practice, an article title (from the English encyclopedia) used in Commons as is, or in a compound name, can only have a single meaning, matching with the topics in the Wikipedia article. I think we are unable to manage any other way to proceed.
There are cultural topics in the English Wikipedia (like en:Catalan Countries), and we can create matching categories in Commons (we have already numberous categories about cultural topics, like in Category:Languages or Category:Ethnic groups); we don't need special rules for Martorell case. --Juiced lemon 17:22, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Article titles can have multiple meanings, that is the whole purpose of disambigious pages. -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:20, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Other notes

Hi, here one of the acolytes of Martorell (God... why loosing the respect for other people?). Sorry, false friend.--Xtv 22:27, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I really can not understand how can be possible that somebody acts so much against a solution which respects his point of view (categorizing using the todays polytical borders) and also another point of view which is not confusing (since the "standard" is also included) and very usefull for the people who actualy live in that region...--Xtv 14:41, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Wiktionary:acolyte: what are the grounds for your remark?
You said: very usefull for the people who actualy live in that region; its your single opinion, not the opinion of people who lives in the Autonomous community of Catalonia, not the opinion of people who lives in Pyrénées-Orientales.
More, media files in Commons about a region are not only for people who lives there, but for all people in the World. And population of Catalonia is roughly 0,11 % of World population...
Your claims seams to be in the inverse ratio of your representativeness. --Juiced lemon 16:34, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
JL is irrespectful to Catalan language, culture and history. As it's usual with the French ideology he tries to abolish every other language than his. So it' no surprise his attitude of denying reality and not being able to accept than Catalan is still spoken in Northern Catalonia, no matter which side of the frontier it is. Eventually, any linguist can prove easily than State's frontiers are not accurate to language's territories.
Perpinyà and the rest of Northern Catalonia are part of Catalonia because Catalan is spoken there. Not because there's a different race, a different religion, or because of the reason of the weapons (as Spaniards and Frenchs did), but just due to a cultural reason.
[[Category:Catalonia]] and [[Category:France]] are both true, being one cultural and the other political.
--Casaforra (parlem-ne) 15:07, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
STOP ATTACKING EACH OTHER. No comments are allowed about the supposed motivations of any other user. Don't make any comments about ideology. Just talk about the most sensible way to organise the media and categories. --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 15:28, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Answering to Pfctdayelise's request, I've decided to stroke out all my comments that can be considered off topic or a personal attack. Feel free to stroke any other comment of mine that you think it doesn't help. --Joanot Martorell 17:26, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Thankyou, Martorell. pfctdayelise (说什么?) 00:33, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
I respect any language, culture and history, but I don't respect propaganda and diffusion of wrong and unsourced informations. Martorell claims that Catalan is the local language in Pyrénées-Orientales, that is wrong and unsourced: I could as well maintain that English is the local language in this French department.
Martorell uses activist methods: harping, support by other(?) users and anons, no or wrong sources, no argued accusations like “he tries to abolish every other language than his” (though I initiated the dual structure for languages in Commons - see Languages of <country> subcategories in Category:Languages by country). --Juiced lemon 13:51, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Wrong sources? Do you mean that sources managed from the governamental Conséil Général des Pyrénées Orientales (Northern Catalonia) are wrong? This local government published a map where it's telling their pride of the Catalan heritage and the Catalan language:
Aquest mapa us és ofert pel Consell General dels Pirineus Orientals molt orgullós de la seua catalanitat i de les seues arrels (translation: This map is offered to you by the General Council of the Pirineus Orientals feeling very proudly because of our catalanity and our heritage).
In this map toponyms are used in Catalan form also. Also in this map no French cantons are shown, but municipalities are grouped in traditional Catalan comarcas. And, finally, in this map border between France and Spain is more thin than border between Northern Catalonia and France (notice that Occitan comarca of Fenolleda isn't being included in Northern Catalonia). Protest them if you think they are wrong, is the best instance, instead here in Commons. But leave us to work, to make Commons useful for everybody.
In other way, also in en:WP the article about Catalan language are telling that Catalan is spoken in Pyrénées-Orientales. Try to change it, say in discussion page of this article that it's wrong and unsourced. Try it, please, because in the whole 78kb long there is no subject discussing about some wrong and unsourced information related to Pyrénées-Orientales. I think here anybody doubts that Catalan language is spoken in this French region. Anybody doubts that Catalonian culture is expressed in this French region, and it's Northern Catalonia. --Joanot Martorell 16:06, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Visit the web page of Perpignan (the Capital of the Pyrénées-Orientales and you'll see that Juiced is lying, and that he knows it becasuse he is a chauvinistroll. 14:40, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

This anon uses the Computer network of the University of Barcelona. He has just vandalized Category:Ibiza. --Juiced lemon 15:12, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
What's the question? He's a Catalonian from Barcelona as a Catalonian from Perpinyà. You're a French person as a French person from Perpignan, and what's the problem?. I'm not Catalonian nor French. I'm Valencian and Spanish. So it would be supposed that I'm more neutral than you. He only dissapoints your opinion. It's not vandalism. Remember right of free speech. Anons comments and contribs are always welcome in Commons. They have the same rights as me, as you, and as every registered user. The only one exception is they have no right to vote. --Joanot Martorell 16:06, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

In answer of Juiced lemon comment of 20 Jan:

  • It is obvious that the images of media about Catalonia will be more used in the Catalan Wikipedia than the Japanese one. Of course I'm not restricting this usage, but this is a fact. Therefore, I think that this 0,11% of the population of the world, has something to say when we are considering a fact specially related on that place.
  • You said that it's my opinion that this categorisation will be very useful for the people of Catalonia and not the opinion of the people who actually lives there. Can you proof that your assertion is true? However, I see that although Catalan is about the 84th most spoken language, the Catalan Wikipedia is in the 20th position of Wikipedias. Even if all the Catalan speakers have another native language (even Spanish or French). This shows that in the Catalan community there is a special interest in our culture, and Wikipedia is a good place to develop it. As a usual contributor on the Catalan Wikipedia, I can assure you that for me is crucial to have those categories, in order to find better the information and save time. Now can you show me some of the people of Catalonia, contributors to the Catalan Wikipedia who say that this categorisation is a mess?
  • Finally, there are hundreds of pages from the north-Catalonia who claim themselves Catalan: for example the Official Tourist information of Perpinyà-Perpignan. I have a question: they call themselves Catalan ("Perpignan, la Catalane"). The people from the Autonomous Community of Catalonia consider them Catalan. Why are you the only who don't want to consider them not only French but also Catalan?--Xtv 22:27, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Btw, I find not very nice your other(?) in your post of 25 Jan.--Xtv 23:37, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

JL disruption on Category:Eivissa

I protest!. While there's an ongoing discussion and debate about the solution about toponyms in Catalan name, and about Catalonia, Juiced Lemon made this kind of changes on Category:Eivissa as a response of an anonymous change. I demand to some administrator to revert it to versions on dates before this dispute, it means the date of arbitration started in August 31th 2006. At least. --Joanot Martorell 10:17, 25 January 2007 (UTC) PD: More changes on Eivissa, Image:Ibiza, and Mapas de Ibiza.

The first one is a proposed move template, not a move template, and it seems fine to me to keep it there. The other edits however were clearly about Catalonia, and Juiced Lemon should not make such edits. I hereby warn Juiced Lemon not to make any edits related to Catalonia or Catalan names. And for both of you, please comment on solution 5. -- Bryan (talk to me) 11:19, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Catalonia is an Autonomous community of Spain, and Balearic Islands are another Autonomous community of Spain. These are obviously two separate issues, since Balearic Islands are not part of the en:Principality of Catalonia.
If you had wanted to extend this dispute to the cultural entity en:Catalan Countries, it had to be named “Catalan Countries”, and not “Catalonia”.
At least, when I have put the move template in Category:Eivissa, I moved one picture named Image:Ibiza.jpg and Category:Mapas de Ibiza. Recently, I reverted some edits by an anon. I hope that anonymous users have not more rights that registered ones in Commons. --Juiced lemon 12:41, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Remember that the Arbitration was started because of the usage of Catalan language form on toponyms, not only because of Catalonia (specially Northern Catalonia). If we read the arbitration we would be noticed that there are long discussion about Catalan names for Valencian places. The dispute is because of two issues: your missconception about Catalonia, and your rejectingto use Catalan name for Catalan-speaking places (it means, Catalonia -French and Spanish-, Valencia and Balearic Islands, Aragonese Fringe, and the city of L'Alguer). --Joanot Martorell 16:12, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Record of JL changes after August 31th

  • 2006 November 26th, he changes "Eivissa" to "Ibiza". Also he changes "Illes Balears" to "Balearic Islands".

Additional comments

God knows what I've gotten myself into by replying to this but here goes. I regularly maintain Category:Train stations in France and I am confronted with contributors who insist on the existence of an area called Catalonia in France. The categories, usually clearly set up forbid Catalonia categories to feature in French ones since there is no administrative authority of that name in France.

I have twice now removed Category:Train stations in France from Category:Train stations in Catalonia. There currently is no content in Category:Train stations in Catalonia that is in France, furthermore, all media of railway stations in France is found in Category:Train stations in France and not in Category:Train stations in Catalonia.

Can we please think about this so that a redundant and off topic category can be removed? Captain Scarlet 10:24, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Don't be confused. Nobody insists on an "existence of an area called Catalonia in France". Catalonia is not in France. Catalonia is a cultural and historical region divided between France and Spain. And even the French institutions recognize it as so [5], [6]. For the Catalan people, this categorisation is usefull. Why does it annoy you so much?--Xtv 22:25, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
no Catalonia
No France
I think I was quite clear in my comment above. No content in Category:Train stations in Catalonia is in France and all media corresponding to France would not be in the Catalonian category but in Category:Train stations in France. Would it be Spanish, it would be in Category:Train stations in Spain. The Catalonian category should be maintained as an administrative category, not a historical one, especially when all media in French category is sorted in administrative categories to keep the number of categories down and not create redundancy which is what this category is, wether it is recognised by local governments or not. Maybe I should create all the categories for French regions so I could make a request for this pollution to stop, and for good. There should be no two categorisation schemes, either all historic or all administrative, not both together as it creates unnecessary redundancy of categories.
Captain Scarlet 23:30, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Well, this is the discussion since long ago. Take administrative or cultural borders (well, our proposal is to take ALSO, not only, administrative borders, it is ALSO intersting, of course, to have the corresponding categories with administrative borders). For the Catalan Wikipedia users, it is very useful to have the category Catalonia as cultural category. No redundance. Don't undersand what's bad on it.
In Category:Train stations in France there are some images (Image:Gare-de-perpignan.jpg) which should be included in Category:Train stations in Catalonia if your friend Juiced lemon hadn't removed this category.
The use you made of this maps is biased. Thet are respecting the administrative borders (the map of Catalonia, for example is complitely clear: Localisation of the AUTONOMOUS COMUNITY of Catalonia). Ok. No problem. There are also maps with the other point of view (Image:Catalonia2.png, Image:Localització de la Catalunya Nord respecte Catalunya.png). Both points of view don't have to be incompatible.
And thank you for your correction. As you have already noticed, sadly, my English is not native. --Xtv
Redundancy occurs when information is present twice in an 'area', in this case stations in Spain being present in a category concerning spanish stations as well as a category for catalonian sations. This would not be a problem is all spanish stations were sorted by historical regions; which is absurd by that because this classification uses historical boundaries, they vary through time and causes two categorisation systems to coïncide and create the presence of endless loops. IF there is to the presence of catalonian stations then the category should not be included in stations in France, because media would be present in both the parent and daughter category, which causes a redundancy and is against the manual of style. Either add stations in Catalonia to Perpignan and remove stations in catalonia from stations in France as per MoS, or remove stations in Catalonia as per current categorisation system of using current defined and unalterable regional boundaries. If this is not clear, I'll have once more remove stations in Catalonia from stations in France due to the redundancy of information imposed upon by the catalonian categorisation system. Captain Scarlet 22:53, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
And what about Catalonia being not inside Spain nor France but a region in Europe, and then Station in Perpignan being in Stations of France and in Stations of Catalonia (the latter contained in Catalonia and Stations in Europe). No redundacy nor loop anymore, we have our useful categorisation and you have your administrative categorisation.--Xtv 15:34, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm fine with that. Captain Scarlet 19:48, 19 February 2007 (UTC)


Cool Cat's putside opinion

I think it is poor taste to compare a disputed region with another disputed region. Each disputed region has its own often very complicated politics and have little in common aside from being disputed.

In my view categories of disputed regions should only be used for images directly related to the actual dispute (such as pictures of people involved/relevant images such as maps and etc.) and not for some commons version of Risk territory grab.

--Cat out 20:32, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Status August 9th 2008 - conclusion

After a relatively stable period of 24 months (for the province names) and 18 months for the "Land of Valencia" name, the edit war restarted again, mainly for the Land of Valencia name. On the english Wikipedia, the name changes reguraly too.

While some people tried to move to the "Valencian Community" name, this was rejected because the commons naming convention would require the "community of Valencia" name. This name too encountered resistence , so it has been decided to go back to the "Land of Valencia" and to the province names as used in the english wikipedia, thereby avoiding the discussion between Spanish and Catalan names.

This dispute is now closed and the situation of last month (before the "last great Valencian edit war") is being restored. --Foroa (talk) 17:00, 29 August 2008 (UTC)