Talk:Rajoy government

Cabinet

Hi @Impru20: It haven't made sense to divide the composition between composition and caretaker because it is the same. Regards. --Panam2014 (talk) 13:09, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes @Pannam2014: it's a continuation of the same cabinet. Because of that, it is put in the same article rather than in a new one. But it has much sense to have it in there, because the outgoing cabinet was officially dismissed on 22 December 2015 (well, the royal decree was from 21 December, but it was published and entered into effect on the 22th). While usually caretaker cabinets since 1975 have historically been quite short (spanning from just after a general election had been held to the day the new PM was appointed, which usually happened in a very short time), this time we've had a caretaker cabinet lasting for nearly a year. Several ministers have been dismissed or have resigned, and we've now known the full extent of how a caretaker cabinet operates in a situation where the rest of the country is still functioning normally. So, why does it make sense? Because:

1. Changes in a caretaker cabinet are not changes in the "official" cabinet. That cabinet goes extinct after the general election. So, you can't list them as such since that'd be technically inaccurate.
2. No new ministers may be appointed when a caretaker cabinet is in office, nor does the PM have freedom to do so. That's why since 22 December 2015 we had a lot of interim ministers, because Rajoy could not name new ones to replace Soria, Pastor or Alonso after they left and had to re-assign those ministries' functions to other posts. And he did so only because he had to fill the vacancies, not because he chose to make any cabinet reshuffle (which he couldn't do in this period).
3. Separating a caretaker cabinet within the same article allows for having re-directs from other articles to that specific cabinet, rather than to the full-fledged one. Also most accurate if one wishes to write article sections referencing the caretaker cabinet specifically.
4. Common practice in Wikipedia is to have caretaker cabinets with their own articles. That's going actually far beyond what has been done here, and proves that they're indeed recognized as distinct. However, in other countries caretaker cabinets may not work the same way than they do in Spain. No appointment or sworn in takes place (this is different for countries such as Greece, were caretaker cabinets are actually sworn into office). Instead, they are merely a continuation of the previous, outgoing cabinet, which is automatically dismissed after a general election takes place and with officeholders maintaining their ministries' functions until a new government is appointed just for the sake of interim management. As a result, for Spain's case they're more properly placed in the article for the outgoing cabinet, but they're undoubtedly distinct and should be listed as such.

I hope to have solved your doubts. Cheers. Impru20 (talk) 16:30, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

@Impru20: Thank you. Why not create an item on the provisional government Rajoy?--Panam2014 (talk) 20:51, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

@Pannam2014: Provisional Rajoy government? You mean this? Impru20 (talk) 20:57, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

@Impru20: the caretaker cabinet. --Panam2014 (talk) 21:08, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

@Pannam2014: Not for Spanish cases. As you said previously, this was just the same first Rajoy Cabinet but in an acting role. It would not make any sense to have a separate article for it, specially since there's a caretaker cabinet everytime a general election takes place (you would have to create a separate article for every caretaker cabinet, when all of them are just mere continuations of outgoing governments). Having them in the same articles than the cabinet they originate from is enough and more accurate. Impru20 (talk) 21:13, 3 November 2016 (UTC)