Talk:Catalan independence movement/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Requested move 19 September 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: page not moved - per discussion, this was unanimously opposed, and the request was withdrawn. (closed by non-admin page mover) Steven Crossin ^{Help resolve disputes!} 11:33, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

---

Catalan independence movement → Catalan independence –

The important rules here are WP:CRITERIA and WP:COMMONNAME:

1)Recognizability - The proposed title is more recognisable than the present one, being more closely linked to the concept itself.

2)Naturalness - Since the real topic here is the concept of Catalan independence, not the movement itself, the proposed title is more natural.

3)Precision - The real topic here is the concept of independence. This is demonstrated by the section on the opponents of independence, and criticism of the idea of independence, which would be something not covered in an article that was simply about the movement itself, any more than you would expect to see a section on the UK Conservative party in the article on the UK Labour party. Moreover none of things you would expect to see for a political movement are present - there is no indication of membership, structure, organisation etc. that you would expect to see in an article about an actual political movement (see e.g., Labour movement).

4)Conciseness - Catalan independence is 20 characters including the spaces vs 29 for the present title.

5)Consistency - other articles related to the proposed independence of a territory typically have the title "XXXX independence", see Scottish independence, Welsh independence, English independence, Hong Kong independence. The main exception is where the concept is better known as "nationalism" (e.g., Basque nationalism, Corsican nationalism) or separatism/secession, but this title has been rejected in previous discussions because "nationalism", "secession" and so-forth are thought to have negative connotations.

6)Common Name - Remembering that GScholar hits are preferred to ordinary Google hits as they show use in reliable sources, and that you have to page through to the last page of results to see the actual count as Google's estimate is wildly inaccurate, I note that there are more than 980 GScholar hits for "Catalan independence" (I can't give the exact figure as it crashes after the 98th page) v 383 GScholar hits for "Catalan independence movement". "Catalan independence" is clearly the common name for the movement.
EDIT: proposal withdrawn. FOARP (talk) 15:29, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose. 1) The article was moved from "Catalan independence" to "Catalan independence movement" in 2017 precisely because it "is about the movement for Catalan independence, not about the topic of Catalan independence in general." 2) It is in Category:Independence movements, in which "independence movement" articles outnumber "independence" articles. To be precise, it is used in 15 pages and 18 subcategories. 3) "Independence" will always get more hits than "independence movement", but that doesn't make it a common name. To say that "'Catalan independence' is clearly the common name for the movement" is frankly bizarre. "Movement" here refers to a broad popular movement rather than a duly constituted organisation, and it's perfectly natural to have a section on its opponents. And where in the Labour movement article is there indication of membership, structure, organisation etc.? Scolaire (talk) 18:05, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Your points can be summarised as "it's a movement", but this is not what the article says. It refers repeatedly to independence as a concept, includes a section on opponents of independence (which is off-topic if the article is about the movement for independence). Even the translations of the title at the top of the page refer to the title as "Catalan independence". You refer to the category it is in - it is unsurprising that the category in which independence movements are located discusses independence movements, but this has no bearing on the title of this page. Finally, the 2017 discussion appears to have been done under the assumption that independence had already been achieved (it was at the time of declaration), which is obviously not true.

I'm not going to comment further. Let's see what others have to say. Scolaire (talk) 16:40, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

• @Old Naval Rooftops, Fluous, Tuxipedia, UnknownM1, Alex the Nerd, Nixinova, Stranger195, and Impru20: who took part in the previous move discussion. Scolaire (talk) 16:40, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose. The current name for the article is clearly the most appropriate name for the topic. The region is not yet a separate country, perhaps unfortunately, but still, we go by facts, and facts don't point to the proposed move target. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 20:45, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose - All goes down to the article's scope. It does not cover the topic of Catalan independence in general, but rather focuses on the actual movement. As per this:

1. "Catalan independence" is indeed much more ambiguous than "Catalan independence movement", so by no means would it meet precision.
2. As explained by Scolaire, it would not meet consistency either as other similar articles throughout Wikipedia about non-independent self-determination movements are mostly named as "independence movement".
3. On concise, it should be noted that it does not equal to "shorter": for a title to be concise, it must be no longer than necessary to identify the article's subject and distinguish it from other subjects. "Catalan independence" is shorter indeed, but it does not properly identify the article's subject nor distinguishes it from other subjects (i.e. the coverage of the proper Catalan independence movement as opposed to Catalan independence in general).
4. Recognizability and Common Name are both the same characteristic, actually. The key issue here is that the name must indicate the subject of the article, which "Catalan independence" does not properly accomplish (i.e. "Catalan independence" could refer to an ideal, a political position, an actual status on Catalonia being independent or whatever. On the other hand, "Catalan independent movement" does properly indicate the subject of this article). Thus, a name does not become a "common name" just because it gets more hits in Google. It depends on it fitting the actual topic at hand.
5. Naturalness does not refer to the article's subject, but to the title not looking awkward (i.e. "Catalan independence" or "Catalan independent movement" as opposed to, let's say, "Catalonian independency" or "Movement of Catalan pro-independence people"). As such, both "Catalan independence" or "Catalan independent movement" would meet the criterion so this would not be contentious, actually.

As a result, it should be "Catalan independence movement" instead. Impru20^talk 21:24, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose move. As I said a few years ago, the subject is the movement, not independence in general. O.N.R. ^(talk) 08:37, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
• Withdraw nom - I still think this article as presently written is about the concept not the movement but ultimately if other editors want it to be about the movement then so be it. FOARP (talk) 09:51, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Percent of what? & no citation

Article says, "Results showed a 90% vote in favour of independence, with a turnout of 43%." This statement should be clarified and reliable sources given. I think what the truth is, is that 90% of those who voted favored independence. But what does the 43% refer to? 43% of registered voters? 43 percent of the citizens? 43 percent of adult citizens? 43 percent of those who are eligible to vote (excluding criminals who can't vote)? (PeacePeace (talk) 05:13, 28 October 2017 (UTC))

Turnout is conventionally understood to mean percentage of eligible voters. It is not usually defined precisely in Wikipedia articles because it is not usually defined precisely in the sources. To answer the question you didn't ask except in the section heading, there is a citation (to this source) in the relevant section of the article. Scolaire (talk) 08:13, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Moreover, I must mention that in Spain, in general, people in prison and people who have been in prison can vote. Also, people are automatically registered to vote, so '43%' means '43%' of the adult population with official residence in Catalonia. --Smalde (talk) 08:46, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Polling section badly needs a cleanup

I have a vague memory of coming here years ago complaining that the opinion polling section was a mess and it seems it hasn't improved since then. I propose a page Opinion polling on Catalan independence (a la Opinion polling on Scottish independence be created with all the detail currently present in the polling section moved there, and the current section be replaced with a table typical of opinion polling tables across Wikipedia (eg. Opinion polling on Scottish independence#Post-referendum_polling or Quebec sovereignty movement#Opinion_polls. I have already begun work on such a table, though I don't have the time to fill it out fully. If there is no opposition to this proposal I will put it in place. - Dalta (talk) 04:04, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

I support this proposal. The section unduly clutters the article. Scolaire (talk) 13:20, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

I have made the change - Dalta (talk) 08:52, 15 November 2020 (UTC)