Talk:Galicia en Común

En Común and Grupo Común da Esquerda

En Común and Grupo Común da Esquerda are not the same! First of all, En Común (also known as Galicia en Común or En Común-Unidas Podemos) is a political coalition, and split of En Marea, to contest the April 2019 Spanish general elections (formed by We Can, United Left, Equo and Tides in Common) and the November 2019 Spanish general elections (only formed by We Can and United Left, due to Equo decided to contest with Más País). Because of this split of En Marea, the parliamentary group "En Marea" broke. The four deputies of En Marea party went to the Mixed Group and the other ten deputies (8 from En Común and 2 from Anova) continued together in their own parliamentary group. This group received the name of Grupo Común da Esquerda but now is neither a political party nor has concurred to the general or Galician elections. Thank you very much for the one who can correct it. Greetings to all! --Alberto el93 (talk) 03:32, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I am being forced to revert your massive and unilateral disruption across Wikipedia. Every information in this article is sourced, you should seek consensus for your changes before conducting such massive changes; this is not the Spanish wikipedia nor should this mirror what is reflected there. As of this page, "En Común" is essentially GEC without Anova, so there is no difference between them aside from the name. Cheers. Impru20^talk 04:50, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Actually, I'm seeing you've engaged in the same disruptive behaviour at the Spanish wiki, changing A LOT of party colors unilaterally at your leisure there as well. If you do not seek consensus for such massive changes in all wikis you participate in, you could end up having trouble with other users. This is not the way to do things. Impru20^talk 04:59, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Really? Are you watching it? You reverse the issues even when I have put before a notice to agree. Look, it's not a matter of the name or if Anova is there or not. GCE does not exist outside the Parliament of Galicia because it is the name of a parliamentary group and is neither a party nor has it been constituted as such nor has it been submitted to elections. If you put that GCE has two deputies in Congress, it is a lie. If you put that In Common it is simply a group without Anova, it is a lie. If you use the color of GCE to represent In Common, it is a mistake, since they are two different things. In Common it is a coalition and GCE, no. If you do not explain that In Common it was formed by four parties and now by only two, you are lying. It is not debatable because you only have to consult the documents of the Central Electoral Board. If you persist in maintaining false information, I will have to report it because you are reverting true information to keep yours that is not true. Alberto el93 (talk) 06:04, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, but the article does not imply GCE exists outside the Parliament of Galicia. GCE is the name used for the parliamentary group, En Común is the one used for the current electoral coalition. It is too soon as of yet to create two separate articles on this topic because we may very well end up merging them in the future, given that the only changes are Anova's presence (absent from general elections) and the name. There is no rush to get things done over here and what you suggest is a mere technicality that does not justify your relevant changes. Impru20^talk 06:15, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Mmm, I see. Well, what you raise is reasonable. Do you think it's okay if I edit the article to contextualize everything, @Impru20:? I propose to rename it to "In Common", due to it is a registered electoral coalition, and, within the article, to dedicate a section to the GCE, its icon, its composition and everything related. It could also be useful for a future article in Spanish Wikipedia. Regards! --Alberto el93 (talk) 07:55, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

I deliberately favor avoiding the use of "En Común" as the article name as of now because, due to the composition of the electoral coalition (Podemos and EU), it is basically a sub-branch of the Unidas Podemos coalition with no other differences. The GEC umbrella (which includes Anova and Marea Atlántica) provides the basis and notability requisite justifying the article's existence; otherwise, this could very well have been dealt with in the main Unidas Podemos article. Everything around Unidas Podemos' coalitions and alliances is somewhat chaotic (obviously not your, mine or anyone else's fault), so proper coverage for these can't be provided until the confluences are fully defined. Nonetheless, feel free to provide more context if you wish. Impru20^talk 08:12, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

I think the name of "In Common" is better for the development that the coalition has had: split of En Marea, constitution of 4 parties and after 2 ... In addition, the coalition of "In Common" is prior (15 Mar 2019) to the creation of the GCE (3 Sep 2019), as can be seen in the electoral constitution document of the Central Electoral Board. The only thing that "In Common" and GCE have in common are We Can and United Left, due to Anova was not part of "In Common" and neither Equo nor Tides in Common of GCE.

On the other hand, if there is consensus to leave the article with the same name, we should eliminate the left-wing electoral alliance (because it has not been submitted to elections). The successor to the En Marea confluence (because there is no successor to En Marea, but In Common that is a split) would have to be replaced by successor to the En Marea parliamentary group. Next, En Marea separated between the continuators of the own project En Marea and the rest of the parties (Podemos, EU, Equo and Mareas, forming En Común and, on the other hand, Anova, which is not part of En Marea or En Common).

Finally, the one who attended the general elections was In Common and not GCE, so we should change the color of the seats bars or eliminate the section of the general elections and the sections of the Congress and Senate of the card and add it in United we can. Greetings! --Alberto el93 (talk) 09:34, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

This article is meant to cover the specific political subject that has come to succeed En Marea as part of Podemos' confluences. That's GCE, not En Común, which is merely a re-branded Unidos Podemos alliance specific to Galicia. If it was meant to cover the later, then that would have been left for Unidas Podemos to cover, as there is not just enough material yet to justify creating an "En Común" article of its own. That's the point. Impru20^talk 16:33, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

A political subject can succeed another when it is constituted as such. The only thing that exists of GCE is the name of the parliamentary group. It is not a party, nor is it an electoral alliance, nor is it a political subject heir to En Marea for two reasons: it is not registered as a coalition in any official source (for example, the Central Electoral Board) and, second, because they have not attended together to an Anova and Unidos Podemos elections. Outside Parliament, GCE DOES NOT EXIST. In addition, Anova is not a confluence of Podemos because it existed as a party years before Podemos, considering that Anova is itself a coalition. On the other hand, it is not true that In Common it is a "renowned brand" of United We can because the coalition of En Común is constituted with others two parties that are not part of Unidas Podemos: Tides in Common and Equo. It would be the same as saying that En Comú Podem is a "renowned brand" of Unidas Podemos in Catalonia, which is nonsense. Finally, GCE have NO representatives in the General Courts. The two deputies, Yolanda Díaz and Antón Gómez-Reino are from EN COMÚN and not from GCE, because GCE has NEVER attended a general election.

1. 1201296 El Correo Gallego: "The one who will be the institutional spokesperson for the Group, Manuel Lago, has clarified that the new name only represents the parliamentary group and does not advance the denomination of any electoral brand for the autonomous elections planned for 2020".
2. Galicia E: "The parliamentary group of In Marea, made up of ten deputies from Podemos, Esquerda Unida and Anova, will present on Tuesday the name with which will work this session in the Chamber: GCE".
3. NH Diario: "GCE articulate a candidacy for the next regional elections"
4. Pontevedra Journal: "The parliamentary group "En Marea will be called GCE. [...] The change takes place with the objective of not to confuse citizens with the name of En Marea, the party that organically still directs Luis Villares".
5. The Galician Ideal: "This is a change of name, not a project change. [...] Born with Galician Left Alternative and continued with the success of the municipal tides."

If you do not let this that I am pointing to you be corrected, because it is a lie, I will have to report it, @Impru20:--Alberto el93 (talk) 23:07, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

The article lead states Grupo Común da Esquerda is a left-wing alliance and parliamentary group in Galicia formed in September 2019 by MPs from Podemos, Anova–Nationalist Brotherhood and United Left, as a successor to the En Marea confluence. This is, your own concerns are already explained in the article's text, and everything in the article is backed in the sources provided there. It should be noted that all of it reflects the current state of affairs. You are making assumptions as to how it will be (or won't be) in the future, which is outrighly prohibited under WP:CRYSTALBALL. Once events take place, we shall reflect them. As of now, we must reflect what there is as of currently. This is very simple to understand. "En Común" is a mere extension of the "Unidas Podemos" alliance in Galicia, and thus not meriting its own stand-alone article; this article is about GCE and the eventual political subject that will go on to contest regional elections; so far this political space is dubbed as GCE now. Really, very very very simple to understand, even for you.

Maybe it is you the one becoming a very tendentious editor here. Impru20^talk 23:12, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

I don't know if it's a lack of reading comprehension or that you answer directly the first thing that comes to your mind. The first thing is that it is not submission, but the truth isn't told in the article. This is not about "doing as in the Spanish Wiki" and that you have everything organized identical, this is that the information in the article is not true, although I am telling you in good ways for days.

I will make it easy for you and I will explain it to you as nursery children:

as a successor to the En Marea confluence: False. GCE is not the successor of En Marea because En Marea continues to exist and there are other political actors in it. In any case, GCE is the successor of Galician Left Alternative, as he puts it later in the article and as it says expressly the spokesman of the group in the news that I have put you and that you have not read.

Spokesperson in Congress: Yolanda Díaz: False. Yolanda Díaz is the spokeswoman for En Común, not the spokeswoman for GCE. GCE does not exist outside the Parliament of Galicia. GCE does not exist in the Congress of Deputies and Anova is not in Congress either to consider that GCE is present.

Preceded by: En Marea: False. The successor of a political party cannot be varying depending on how the deputies choose to sit together. In any case, it would be necessary to put "Split of: En Marea"

National affiliation: Unidas Podemos: False. Anova, and therefore GCE, is not affiliated with Unidas Podemos because it is not part of En Marea or En Común.

Congress of Deputies: 2/23: False. Yolanda Díaz and Antón Gómez-Reino are deputies of En Común and not of GCE, as you would have seen if you had read the official files of the Congress that I have attached to you. They were chosen to attend with En Común and not with GCE. GCE only exists in the Parliament of Galicia.

Electoral performance: False. GCE has not attended any elections, so it cannot have electoral results. The two deputies of Congress are from En Común and the elected senator was from En Marea and, therefore, prior to GCE. GCE is not a party or an electoral coalition. GCE is just a name. Remember, GCE only exists in the Parliament of Galicia.

And finally, as you like guides so much, I advise you to read what you award to me WP:TE. Especially the sections: Accusing others of malice, Repeating the same argument without convincing people, Deleting the pertinent cited additions of others, Seeing editing as being about taking sides and Accusing others of tendentious editing. Really, very very very simple to understand, even for you. Maybe it is you the one becoming a very tendentious editor in English Wiki. :) --Alberto el93 (talk) 23:57, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

You know, everything has been explained to you and you still keep repeating the same mantra over and over again.

Firstly, when the article speaks about the "En Marea" confluence, it refers to the confluence that was formed by Podemos, EU, Anova and others before the split, not to the current tiny party which is one stop short of extinction. Sources within the article very clearly point this out, so you only keep discussing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin here.

Secondly, it is said to you that this refers to the current entity that has succeeded such confluence (and yes, this has a connection to Unidas Podemos), which is not well-defined as of yet. It is pointless to create a myriad articles to cover the same topic, so it is ireelevant whether it is named "En Común", "GCE" or whatever. Once it has a proper name and a proper configuration, it shall be done. We can't anticipate things, and there is no deadline in Wikipedia, despite the rush you seemingly want to put around all of this.

This has attended elections under the name "En Común", this is very clearly explained in the article and there are no possible confusions on it. Again, you trying to keep arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

On WP:TE, I would ask you to read Accusing others of malice (something you did from minute 1), Disputing the reliability of apparently good sources, Expecting others to find sources for your own statements, Repeating the same argument without convincing people (hahaha this looks specifically written for you), Ignoring or refusing to answer good faith questions from other editors, Assigning undue importance to a single aspect of a subject, Righting great wrongs or Crusading against a specific POV, to name a few. :) And yes, one can accuse other of being tendentious when they are in fact being tendentious (in contrast, you only copy-pasted my own reply to you because you find yourself unable to build your own arguments). I see you are new to the English Wikipedia, and seemingly don't know how things work out around here as looking at your way of editing and your discussing style. You can't expect to convince others by boring them into submission by repeating the same idea over and over again. In this case, you have been explained why the article is currently set up as this; "En Común" has only contested one election (two with the November one) and the parliamentary group was just created in September 2019. There is simply not enough information as of yet to justify more than one article (hello WP:GNG), but this is not something that should worry us because Wikipedia is not finished and because it is a work in progress. Once we have more information on the definitive political subject resulting from En Marea's implosion, we can then proceed to build, rename the article or whatever, but you are pressing for making changes on things thathave not yet happened and/or suggesting possible splits without considering notability issues. You have a strong POV on this En Marea subject as seen from your edits in the Spanish wiki, so it's maybe good for you to disconnect from this topic and don't become so focused on it as if this was a major wrong that you need to right.

Nonetheless, none of this preclude further improvements to the current article if deemed necessary. Impru20^talk 09:09, 12 October 2019 (UTC)